macbroadcast´s blog

Fakebook ?
August 2, 2012, 12:55 am
Filed under: Facebook, fraud | Tags: , , ,

Why Do Some Advertisers Believe That 90% Of Facebook Ad Clicks Are From Bots?

To listen to the Facebook (FB) earnings call last week, you would have thought that the management


Image via CrunchBase

team passionately cares about their users’ experience and the care and feeding of their advertising clients.

Here’s Mark Zuckerberg discussing how complex Facebook’s internal systems are to track user behavior and the effectiveness of various ad campaigns:

at any given point, we have a lot of different tests, different algorithms running, and we measure engagement of everything downstream from News Feed and the whole system, right? So obviously, clicks and engagement and feedback in News Feed, how many people want to share, but also how many page views and how much time people spend on Facebook overall, ad performance, everything, down to all of the different tweaks that we do in News Feed, and user sentiment as well. So I think we have pretty robust systems that are built out around this. And one of the things that I think is pretty interesting is what we’ve seen is that we can put in good sponsored content and have it not degrade those metrics. So that’s really what we’re trying to do, is we’re rolling some of these Sponsored Stories out more conservatively because we want to make sure that the quality is very high. And we’re basically continuing to run those tests to make sure that we are producing the best product that we can.

And here is a quote from Sheryl Sandberg on how Facebook is working to give its smaller advertisers the tools to be successful with their Facebook ads:

our third area of progress has been to make it easier for small- and medium-sized businesses to advertise on Facebook. Local business advertising is considered by many to be the Holy Grail of Internet advertising since the market opportunity is so great. This is proving difficult, however, because small business owners often lack the time or ability to adopt new technology. Facebook is uniquely accessible to them. As they typically learn to use Facebook by setting up personal profiles or Timelines, they then discover the value our service can provide them as business owners. Many of the world’s approximately 60 million business owners are already Facebook users. Over 11 million businesses already have pages on Facebook. Over 7 million of these pages are actively used each and every month. In addition, hundreds of thousands of small businesses advertise with us. By making it easier to create a business page and run ads, we believe we can increase the number of small and local businesses who use our tools.

Yet, there are two stories out this morning about small businesses who are frustrated with their Facebook ad experience.

The first was reported in Benzinga (via CNET). In it, the owner complains that Facebook has tried to charge them $2,000 to change its name on its own Facebook page. The analytics are poor and they estimate that 80% of the clicks they get on their Facebook page and Facebook ads are from bots:

“They’re scumbags and we just don’t have the patience for scumbags,” said musician and label-based company Limited Run when discussing its decaying relationship with Facebook (NASDAQ: FB)…. While testing Facebook’s advertising system, Limited Run noticed it could only verify about 20 percent of the clicks that were supposedly being converted to users showing up on its Web site. After trying a few analytics services to figure out the remaining traffic, the company built its own software out of exasperation,” CNET reported, stating that bots were to blame for loading pages and driving up costs.

In a second blog post, Erik Larson had similar complaints, only he estimated that 90% of his Facebook clicks were from spambots.

Erik was frustrated when he first suspected he was getting a lot of fake clicks from his campaign and contacted Facebook customer support. Suddenly, the amazing analytics that Facebook has were not available for this advertiser. Here is the response from Neil in Facebook Global Marketing Support:

we are happy to look into this further if you can provide us with detailed click logs documenting the activity you’re concerned about. We aren’t able to investigate this further without actual traffic logs. We understand this may be a frustrating process, and we apologize for the inconvenience. Please contact your web hosting company directly if you have questions about how to obtain server logs detailing individual clicks or visits to your site, as we aren’t able to verify data collected through third-party tracking systems. In order to assist you further, please include the following information from your server logs:

(A) Raw server logs of all clicks coming to your website, or the total amount of all clicks coming from Facebook, with an explanation of how you filtered them. These server logs should, at the very least, include:

(1) Timestamp of page load
(2) User agent string
(3) User IP
(4) Exact page loaded, with the parameters passed to the page load if you are doing URL tagging. Please note: a popular tracking method is to link your Facebook Ad(s) to unique URLs that are only used for specific Facebook Ad campaigns. Another tracking method is to add an extra, identifying parameter to your URL. By doing so, you’ll be able to isolate visitors who reach your site through Facebook Ads rather than other traffic sources.

(B) Aggregated counts of your clicks.

If possible, please also include the following:
(1) The total number of clicks you received from Facebook, split by day, for the specific time period where you have noticed the click issues.
(2) The total number of clicks you were billed for, by Facebook, also by billable day for the period in question.
(3) A screenshot of your external reporting system showing the total number of clicks received from Facebook.

After some back and forth with the Facebook customer support, and some further digging on his own, Larson sends this response by email:

The problem is that Facebook misled my company with respect to the inherent value of most of the clicks by claiming that these clicks were comparable in value to clicks in other CPC venues or to clicks by FB users with typical and expected interactions with CPC advertising (emphasis added). To be specific, I believe that about 90 percent clicks you charged us for were worth about 1/1000th of the price you charged us. It also seems likely that your company was aware of this disparity in value, because after looking at the data some more it feels like you must have some sort of algorithm in place that invalidates clicks from these users once they pass a certain threshold, but probably you only invalidate clicks after that threshold, not all the clicks that came before. Even more, that threshold appears to be WAY above what any reasonable advertiser would expect it to be.

Specifically, my gut feel is that you allow valid clicks as long as people click fewer than ~4-6 rapid-fire clicks in a minute, and then after that point you invalidate their clicks within a very short session period, probably around an hour or two, but you do not go back and do what everyone would expect you to do and invalidate the first ~4-6 clicks. Further, I imagine you have a very high threshold for clicks in a day, probably ~40-60 daily, and similar to the rapid-fire clicks you do not go back and invalidate the first ~40-60 clicks. It also seems like you have no algorithm at all based on how many annual or total likes a user has, which is somewhat shocking since combining such an long-term algorithm with a rapid-fire algorithm and a daily algorithm would be the best way to identify ‘booklicants’ or ‘likers’ or whatever you want to call this group of users. I’ll continue to call them booklicants because from an advertiser’s perspective they are as much a creation of your product interface as they are regular people with rational interests.

He goes on to describe his personal story using Facebook ads:

I started out advertising my external landing pages like a typical CPC campaign. The CTRs and landing page conversions were terrible but my ads appeared to perform better than the average FB ads, so it felt OK, and the demographics of the clicks validated some of our segmentation assumptions. Then since your app and your marketing highly encourage use of ads to market internal FB content, and you promise much more detailed data about the users, I spiffed up our FB page and ran my first ‘like us’ campaign. WOW! Hundreds of people in less than an hour, and the CPCs were 20-30 percent lower! So I did it some more, right then, spent more money, eventually $170 instead of the $30-50 I’d planned on. It was exciting.

Then I did a little bit to try to get engagement from those users, a few posts to the page, and nothing happened. I read more about how building engagement is a skill that requires investment, and I also began to look into sponsored stories. Luckily, in parallel I was analyzing my fan base and discovered they were not what they appeared to be at first. They were mostly ’booklicants’ who like dozens of things a day. So I didn’t do sponsored stories, I sent you a note asking for my money back. If I had done sponsored stories and managed to get into their streams, then no doubt some of those users would have engaged, because they clearly use FB a lot and I would have been jamming my message in front of their faces…which is what I thought I was doing in the first place, btw. But I bet the competition for those particular streams is relatively intense, not because they are more valuable and more advertisers want to compete for them, but because those people typically like thousands of advertisers, and since I was a small advertiser with an audience comprised primarily of booklicants this would have hit me hardest.

And that is the #1 reason I think what you are doing is wrong. It hits small and unsophisticated advertisers the hardest (emphasis added).

You could have given our money back after my first inquiry saying something like “All of those users are real based on our initial investigations, but we will continue looking into the matter. We value our customers and in particular we appreciate your detailed feedback, so we would like to offer you a $300 credit as a thank you.” I would have been happy, I would have spent a lot more that $300 over the next few months, and I would have enthused about it on my blog, etc. That is not what happened, I suspect because you have internal policies in place that require you to take certain steps to give you legal standing in case of lawsuit, and probably the last thing you want is for people like me to be publicly enthusiastic about large refunds from Facebook as a result of strange click behaviors.

So is Erik Larson just an isolated and disgruntled customer pining for $150 back? Is Limited Run just complaining for some free publicity? Or are these indicative of further problems that other customers are experiencing who might or might not know it?

Is Bot clicking rampant on Facebook as these customers suggest? If it is, doesn’t it bring all of Facebook’s purported user stats into question? It certainly makes you wonder about their revenue projections.

It’s clear that the vision for a “social ad” has merit and is compelling. But when you hear stories like this, it makes you wonder if we are really that close to seeing that vision soon or if it is still many years away.

As a newly public company, Facebook is under implicit and explicit pressure to show that their vision is starting to take off today. Their published CPC, CTR, and invalid click rates warrant much more closer scrutiny going forward.



Article in german



Not-so-clever-bridge AG

Case draft:

cleverbridge, a cologne /german based company seems just pure fraud and claim to sell antivirus software just to get your credidcard information and using it for unauthorized charges and act as payment processor for camshare LLC  for  illegal software licencing / virtuel gifts and other criminal activitys.


We have writen evidence in the following cases:
Credit card fraudTOS violation and illegal music streaming,combined with power tripping operators ,which claim to own people and destroy relation/friendships by sladering and spreading false allegation ,or ban for no reason, a guy called jetta who claims to be, whitch arent working for enforcing their own TOS, 3rd party applications like iceop and that violates users privacy, evasion of taxes and money laundering combined with a product which supports child abuse and physical abuse
(e.g. you need to be 18+ to download the software and can create a teenager 13+ account afterwards without any email notification !! ).

[Image: camshare003.png]

probable cause:
IANAL , but i believe camfrog LLC is hiding behind a german based company calledcleverbridge , because their software called camfrog does not comply with american law, as its writen and they are unable to fullfill the requirements.

I acknowledge that entering below will expose me to sexually
explicit material and the viewing and of such material
is legal in my community. I am at least 21 years of age.

Child Protection and Obscenity Enforcement Act and



host[] said: 550
5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in local recipient table (in reply to RCPT TO command)
Reporting-MTA: dns;
X-Postfix-Queue-ID: CE25223AFF4
X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822;
Arrival-Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 14:29:58 +0200 (CEST)

Contact details

phone: +49 221 – 222 45 – 45
Monday – Friday: 08:00 – 19:00 (MEZ)
Saturday: 09:00 – 16:00 (MEZ)
Sunday: 10:00 – 14:00 (MEZ)
Servicezeiten entsprechend der Zeitzone Europe/Berlin:
Montag – Freitag: 08:00 – 19:00
Samstag: 09:00 – 16:00
Sonntag: 10:00 – 14:00
Fax: +49 221 – 222 45 – 40
Adresse: cleverbridge AG
Brabanter Str. 2-4
50674 Köln -Deutschland

United kindom
Telefon: 0800 8620377 (Freefone Großbritannien)
Montag – Freitag: 07:00 – 18:00 (GMT)
Samstag: 08:00 – 15:00 (GMT)
Servicezeiten entsprechend der Zeitzone Europe/Berlin:
Montag – Freitag: 08:00 – 19:00
Samstag: 09:00 – 16:00

United states of america
Telefon: +1-866-522-6855
(Int.: +1-312-922-8693)
Montag – Freitag: 08:00 – 20:00 (CST)
Samstag: 09:00 – 16:00 (CST)
Sonntag: 10:00 – 15:00 (CST)
Servicezeiten entsprechend der Zeitzone Europe/Berlin:
Montag – Freitag: 15:00 – 03:00
Samstag: 16:00 – 23:00
Sonntag: 17:00 – 22:00
Fax: +1-312-263-7632
Adresse: cleverbridge
360 N. Michigan Ave.
Suite 1900
Chicago, IL 60601-3805-USA

Telefon: +81 120 948264
Montag – Freitag: 09:00 – 18:00 (JST)
Samstag: 09:00 – 16:00 (JST)
Servicezeiten entsprechend der Zeitzone Europe/Berlin:
Montag – Freitag: 02:00 – 11:00
Samstag: 02:00 – 09:00



Hosting location: Czech Republic
Serverhousing: Casablanca…

For further reference search “camfrog” and many thanks to all the datalove . 😉

New server , new luck…..
October 23, 2011, 3:21 am
Filed under: fraud, infografic, linux, phishing, society, Wordpress | Tags: , , , , , , ,

Since some folks try to hack my webserver and phishing facebook  accounts ( see left screenshot ,the php script is linked with image ) and  uploadet banking malware from the royal bank of canada and the citizenbank ( see screenshot below )via a wordpress vulnerability onto my webserver and i had several  hacking attempts , my server was used for a few outgoing  DDos attacks (see screenshots below ).

Subject: Fraudulent site, please shut down! [RBC 11217] IP: Domain:

Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 04:23:45 +0300

From: <>

Dear Sirs:

RSA , an anti-fraud and security company, is under contract to assist

Royal Bank of Canada and its related entities (“RBC”) – A leading

Canadian bank – in preventing or terminating online activity that

targets RBC’s clients as potential fraud victims.

RSA has been made aware that*you appear to be providing Internet

Services to a fraudulent Web site*, which is part of a “phishing scam”*.

This activity violatesRBC’s copyright, trademark and other intellectual

property rights and may violate the criminal laws ofCanada, the United

States and other nations.

E-mail messages have been broadly distributed to individuals by a person

or entity pretending to beRBC. These e-mails useRBC’s name and identity

(including trademarks) without authorization. The e-mails request

recipients to verify and submit sensitive details related to theirRBC


*Within the fraudulent e-mail message, there is a link that leads the

recipients to a fraudulent website displaying****RBC’s**copyrighted

materials and trademarks. The fraudulent website is located at the

following URL address


which you provide services and which is under your control.*

The fraudulent website not only represents a misuse ofRBC’s intellectual

property; its purpose is to improperly obtain personal information ofRBC

customers in order to fraudulently access their bank accounts. The

people behind those websites typically perpetrate identity-theft related

activities, such as using customer’s credit cards or bank accounts

without authorization. In addition, since the vast majority of all of

the e-mails are not being sent to actualRBC customers, the actions serve

to damage the reputation and image of RBC.

*Please take all necessary steps to immediately shut down the fraudulent

website, terminate its availability to the Internet and discontinue

the****transmission of any e-mails associated with this website.*

*We understand that you may not be aware of this improper use of your

services and we appreciate your cooperation. We specifically would ask

that you also take the following actions:*

• Please provide us with a tar/zip file of the source code for this

site, so that we may analyze it to help prevent further attacks.

• If any customer data has been captured that is stored on your systems

or equipment, please send us that data so that the customers to whom

that data relates can be notified and take steps to protect their credit.

• Please provide a copy of any records you maintain that indicate the

name, contact information, method of payment or similar information that

may be useful in helping learn the identity and location of the customer

for whom the website has been operated.

Thank you for your cooperation to prevent and terminate this fraudulent




RSA Anti Fraud Command Center

Tel: +44(0)800-032-7751 (UK)

Tel: +1-866-408-7525 (US)

Tel: + 1-800-406-8651 (CA)

Fax: +972-9-9728101 (EU)

Fax: +1-212-208-4644 (US)



For more information about RSA’s AFCC _



*cc:*Royal Bank of Canada

_Computer Security Incident Response Team_, RBC Information Security


Address: 315 Front St. W. – 13th Flr, Toronto, Ontario M5V 3A4

Tel: +1 – 416-348-4498

Fax: +1 – 416-348-2751

Email: _CSIRT@rbc.com_ <>


*”Phishing” is an e-mail scam that attempts to trick consumers into

revealing personal information, such as their credit or debit account

numbers, checking account information, Social Security Numbers, or

banking account passwords, through an imposter’s Web site or in a reply



NSA Chief: China Behind RSA Attacks

Chinese steal a “great deal” of military-related intellectual property, and were responsible for last year’s attacks on cybersecurity company RSA, Gen. Keith Alexander tells Senators.



April 8, 2011, 12:02 pm
Filed under: Big Brother, Camfrog, fraud, phishing, society | Tags: , ,

After paltalk aquired camfrog a few month before , camfrog was target from massive DDOS attacks (blog entry removed from No,  not the regular roomattacks, that has been going on for years, this attack  prevent users from  login for 5 days , Camfrogs excuse “Software updates” turned into a reward of  $10,000 to find the attacker.



I think it’s time to let you know that the repeated problems Camfrog has been experiencing over the past several weeks are due to a large denial of service attack against our network.  We have a lot of experience fighting off attacks like this over the years and we have a system in place to make sure an attack will not disrupt our network, but for some reason this time we are having more trouble than usual.

We care about the uptime of Camfrog more than anything and any downtime actually makes me feel physically sick, so please don’t think we are not doing everything in our power to keep Camfrog online.  Our team has a huge amount of experience with situations like this and we will prevail.

At this time we think we know who is responsible for the attack and we are working with law enforcement to make sure they are prosecuted in their country to the fullest extent of the law, however we are also offering a $10,000 USD reward to the first single most important tip that leads to their arrest and successful prosecution.  If you have any tips please make the subject “DDOS Tip” and email it to our helpdesk.

Thanks for your support.
Posted on Sat, 19 Mar 2011 13:05:26 +0000 at…n-camfrog/ Comments:…/#comments

But this wasnt really my concern when i wanted to write something about camfrog because we all know that customers get ripped off for long time and they are Breaking their own TOS and lying about their “Online User counter” .

A friend pointed me to a site called , own by Richard Trudel whitch is used to report possible sexual offender via a screencapture tool. Camfrog has a business relation with this company/site/person ,  but it seems there is phishing/fraud involved so i digged a bit deeper and found some interesting facts  on , complainsboard and Facebook.

Did you ever asked yourself what happend with thousants of pictures of possible sexual offenders that went into a Database of a company whitch claimed to work together with law enforement and they DON´T ?.

What could happen when these information:

Picture, Nickname, Ip adress is connencted with the credidcard information ?

Why does a camfrog/camshare tolerate, that this site points to a login whitch claims to be the camfrog  roomowner/operator login , whitch never exist ?

Source : camfrogcommuninity

UPDATE 04.09.2011:

they removed the page at











As you see on the above Screenshots, chat-security claims to work with the duch
goverment, but they dont.

I used to work for camfrog as an admin for a considerable length of time and I have witnessed many things that occur that are illegal. And yes there are a large numbers of pedophiles that cruise the rooms looking for underage young people.
They often change their adult profiles to a teen to gain access to teenagers. Camfrogs security measures are a complete failure. Bans are easily circumvented and really do nothing to address the problem. Emails for help are either bounced or not answered. In rooms that are G rated there is a constant stream of men masturbating on webcam. And camfrog room owners employ 18 year old girls to admin these rooms exposing them to sexual abuse. Which is paramount to sexual grooming. I was thoroughly disgusted by the dishonesty and indecency by camfrog and its staff and clients.



[Image: camshare.png]

[Image: camshare003.png]


I think I might have a clue to why Camshare LLC is being used to Power Camfrog software and clients. I am just human and guessing here that LLC is claiming to be one owner (Manager) cause he/she doesn’t want to pay standard Corporate taxes in all the money he/she makes in the USA and to its members (shareholders) for the sales purchased threw from all of sales. So is using Camshare LLC company name as a stepping ladder to certain advantages that defeat higher USA taxes.

The photo above shows us that Camshare LLC bears no liability for any damages resulting from the use of the Camfrog software.

This refund from a duped customer made me currious, why comes the money from cleverbridge and why is it in dutch ?

Quote:cleverbridge AG heeft naar u overgemaakt: €42,34 EUR
Transactiereferentie: 1BP54943248109520
Beste Bas van de leur,

cleverbridge AG heeft een bedrag van €42,34 EUR naar u overgemaakt.

Opmerking van afzender, cleverbridge AG:
Refund for your purchase Nr. 1341977…management

Camfrog,Camshare,Cleverbridge seem to have close ties to Craig Vodnik.

Craig Vodnik also worked for Digital River back in April 2004.

Craig Vodnik and his past jobs

Craig Vodnik also runs as Admin on the following websites


So, what does he have in common with all these Businesses? Vice President, Manager with DOUBLE the income right? So Craig Vodnik seems to be quit active in Money making Operations?
Craig Vodnik mentions Camfrog and Facebook 2nd reply in comments…-strategy/
Craig Vodnik writes here the 6th reply in comments…ual-goods/

Craig Vodnik used to fly to Germany giving him the opportunity of cleverbridge AG which is associated to Camshare LLC.

Written here the 6th paragraph down

This picture shows Cleverbridge/Camshare LLC are Partnership

[Image: camshare005.png]

Unauthorized charges


Unauthorized withdraws from my account

Take money without my authorization

Scam Phishing
False charging me,net-koeln

Ripoff debited an account 4 times

Is Avira or Cleverbridge a scam

Ripped off procodes

Scams, Frauds, Reviews And Complaints


Von: Support Team <>
Datum: 24. September 2010 14:36:34 MESZ
Kopie: helpdesk <>
Betreff: Facebook page link


I blocked you from our Facebook page because you linked to a false
website post that said we wrote an email that says we give certain
rooms favoritism and that we use foul language in our helpdesk emails.

I have always worked hard to give you support on our Facebook page and
on Camfrog and on our Blog, but I can’t allow you to post links that
are obviously false like that.

I work the helpdesk sometimes and I would never write something like
that with foul language or give favoritism.  It’s really unfair to
make users think we would ever act that way.  I always try to be fair
to everyone and I have always tried to quickly help you when you ever
had a problem.

Thanks, Craig


Wasnt nice to ban me 1 day before my birthday from camfrog/facebook craig 😛


hackCamfrog is a keylogger developed in Visual Basic 2008. Like other keyloggers, hackCamfrog have the same work, work to catch every key pressed on victim’s keyboard, but by adding some features hackCamfrog is perfect keylogger for hacking Camfrog Video Chat passwords.

-Detect if Camfrog is running on processes
-Detect if Camfrog is installed
-Activate in Camfrog window
-Desktop Phishing
-Encrypt Gmail informations
-Delivery logs when victim loggin on Camfrog
-Delete saved passwords and never remember
-Record keystrokes and get only the password
-Invisible mode



host[] said: 550
5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User
unknown in local recipient table (in reply to RCPT TO command)
Reporting-MTA: dns;
X-Postfix-Queue-ID: CE25223AFF4
X-Postfix-Sender: rfc822;
Arrival-Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 14:29:58 +0200 (CEST)

created:         2005-03-11
updated:         2011-03-15

owner-id:        MT254641
owner-org:       cleverbridge AG
owner-name:      Martin Trzaskalik
owner-address:   Brabanter Str. 2-4
owner-pcode:     50674
owner-city:      Cologne
owner-country:   DE
owner-phone:     +49 221 222450
owner-fax:       +49 221 2224519

admin-id:        MT254641
admin-org:       cleverbridge AG
admin-name:      Martin Trzaskalik
admin-address:   Brabanter Str. 2-4
admin-pcode:     50674
admin-city:      Cologne
admin-country:   DE
admin-phone:     +49 221 222450
admin-fax:       +49 221 2224519

tech-id:         PH380389
tech-org:        cleverbridge AG
tech-name:       Paul Herman
tech-address:    Brabanter Str. 2-4
tech-pcode:      50674
tech-city:       Cologne
tech-country:    DE
tech-phone:      +49 221 222450
tech-fax:        +49 221 2224519

billing-id:      PH380389
billing-org:     cleverbridge AG
billing-name:    Paul Herman
billing-address: Brabanter Str. 2-4
billing-pcode:   50674
billing-city:    Cologne
billing-country: DE
billing-phone:   +49 221 222450
billing-fax:     +49 221 2224519


Created On:31-Oct-2007 15:34:13 UTC
Last Updated On:01-Nov-2010 01:22:26 UTC
Expiration Date:31-Oct-2011 15:34:13 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:OnlineNIC Inc. (R64-LROR)
Registrant ID:ONLC-3056142-4
Registrant Name:Daanvan der Werf
Registrant Street1:Mahlerstraat 40
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Bergen op Zoom
Registrant State/Province:Brabant
Registrant Postal Code:4614 AS
Registrant Country:NL
Registrant Phone:+31.614212965
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:+31.614212965
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Admin ID:ONLC-3056142-1
Admin Name:Daanvan der Werf
Admin Street1:Mahlerstraat 40
Admin Street2:
Admin Street3:
Admin City:Bergen op Zoom
Admin State/Province:Brabant
Admin Postal Code:4614 AS
Admin Country:NL
Admin Phone:+31.614212965
Admin Phone Ext.:
Admin FAX:+31.614212965
Admin FAX Ext.:
Tech ID:ONLC-3056142-2
Tech Name:Daanvan der Werf
Tech Street1:Mahlerstraat 40
Tech Street2:
Tech Street3:
Tech City:Bergen op Zoom
Tech State/Province:Brabant
Tech Postal Code:4614 AS
Tech Country:NL
Tech Phone:+31.614212965
Tech Phone Ext.:
Tech FAX:+31.614212965
Tech FAX Ext.:
Name Server:

Created On:02-Jun-2005 13:39:06 UTC
Last Updated On:05-Jan-2011 09:16:27 UTC
Expiration Date:02-Jun-2011 13:39:06 UTC
Sponsoring Registrar:eNom, Inc. (R126-LRMS)
Registrant ID:2d36debdcc1d6317
Registrant Name:P.  Jansen
Registrant Organization:Camfrog Nederlands
Registrant Street1:Havixhorst 14
Registrant Street2:
Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Zuidlaren
Registrant State/Province:
Registrant Postal Code:9472RL
Registrant Country:NL
Registrant Phone:+31.164652321
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:+31.164652321
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Admin ID:75a6c697e74ce352
Admin Name:P.  Jansen
Admin Organization:Camfrog Nederlands
Admin Street1:Havixhorst 14
Admin Street2:
Admin Street3:
Admin City:Zuidlaren
Admin State/Province:
Admin Postal Code:9472RL
Admin Country:NL
Admin Phone:+31.164652321
Admin Phone Ext.:
Admin FAX:+31.164652321
Admin FAX Ext.:
Billing ID:b025dd3aac8397b4
Billing Name:R.C.  Stoutenbeek
Billing Organization:Xel Media BV
Billing Street1:Postbus 14086
Billing Street2:
Billing Street3:
Billing City:Utrecht
Billing State/Province:NL
Billing Postal Code:3508SC
Billing Country:NL
Billing Phone:+3.1302671710
Billing Phone Ext.:
Billing FAX:+3.1302671710
Billing FAX Ext.:
Tech ID:f1f65ebdcc1d6317
Tech Name:P.  Jansen
Tech Organization:Camfrog Nederlands
Tech Street1:Havixhorst 14
Tech Street2:
Tech Street3:
Tech City:Zuidlaren
Tech State/Province:
Tech Postal Code:9472RL
Tech Country:NL
Tech Phone:+31.164652321
Tech Phone Ext.:
Tech FAX:+31.164652321
Tech FAX Ext.: