Skip to content

Which companies just had a verified incident, who lends to them and who owns them. Every claim carries its evidence level and its source. How we decide what is confirmed

US critical infrastructure monitor

Name.com

Cloud, identity and critical software · National

Monitoring
Not directly monitored. Shown from research findings only.
Public findings
1
Provider status posts on record
0

Cyber and operational findings

Analyst-reviewed records. The grade states how well the cause is established; event, first public observation and acknowledgement are separate dates.

A ConfirmedStatus: recovered

15 client domains improperly redirected (at least 12 DeFi front ends, 10 tied to Vercel) to Step Drainer pages; Name.com restored domains, enhanced client account security, urged DNS review and 2FA. About USD 138K stolen (The Block). Re-verified 5 Nov: no root-cause report or later update found in window.

Event: Oct 31 01:00 UTC
First public: Oct 31
Third-party report: Oct 31
Acknowledged: Oct 31

Other explanations considered: Reseller or customer-credential compromise rather than registrar system compromise (cause unresolved).

Corrected in independent review (retime): Hijack of 15 client domains is confirmed (Name.com: 'restored all affected domains', 'secure the accounts involved'), but registrar compromise is not: a Name.com representative reportedly blamed '3rd party issuers'. Key and label 'Name.com DNS hijack' imply...

  1. Oct 30 · UNK
    name.com's own CT and DNS show nothing in the window (2 issuances vs 1.13 expected: docs.name.com Let's Encrypt 30 Oct, mail.name.com Sectigo 2 Nov, an annual renewal of a 22 Oct 2025 cert). A wildcard *.name.com reissue across SSL.com, Google Trust Services...
    Source
  2. 2026-10-30 to 2026-10-31 · REM
    15 client domains improperly redirected (at least 12 DeFi front ends, 10 tied to Vercel) to Step Drainer pages; Name.com restored domains, enhanced client account security, urged DNS review and 2FA. About USD 138K stolen (The Block). Re-verified 5 Nov: no...
    Source

Provider status posts

Collected from the organisation's own public status page. These are its words; DFX adds only the wording classification.

No status posts collected for this organisation.

Documented dependents

Organisations publicly documented as relying on this provider. A relationship is not an impact.

Name.com
verified; no in-window update after 31 Oct
  • 15 client domains incl. at least 12 DeFi front ends (Flap, Kintsu...No confirmed impact