Skip to content

Comment on DNS abuse and criminal infrastructureparent

Comments

A delay doesn’t even really hurt this use case. The first person to register the domain would still get it, 24 hours later, unless there’s an actual objection.

I think the "actual objection" is the hardest part.

The UK Government might legitimately object to the registration of `dwpgov-uk-payments.pizza` but should they be allowed to object to `dwp-gov-uk-stole-my-payments.fart`?

One might be obviously dodgy, the other is someone ranting about their experience. Do you think Governments should be able to object to domains complaining about them?

I'm not entirely sure. But we have have mechanisms like Google Safe Browsing, and I can imagine that a similar mechanism could be used. Or there could even be a new classification in Safe Browsing and similar databases for newly registered domains that look like they are misleaing, and this could actually be fast enough if there was a 24-hour hold on new domains.

Who defines "actual objection"? The entrenched interests are really good at tilting such processes in their favor.

A delay wouldn't change that. You're talking about the difference of the site being up for a half day or not at all, which is admittedly infinity times longer, but not enough to make any sort of difference (as opposed to putting the anti-entrenched interests info up without its own domain name.)

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.