-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 6:14 AM, Larry Seltzer <[email protected]> wrote:
> http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2355068,00.asp?kc=PCRSS05079TX1K0000 > 992 > > > > So have the security implications of these new domain names really been > thought through? > No. If nothing else, expanding the TLD space expands the abuse footprint. Further, expanding the TLD footprint in areas which are not clearly 'recognizable' by some applications, etc., will certainly have a tendency to be targets for abuse by criminals. Of course, this may sound obvious -- and it is. But expanding the TLD space into the IDN direction is not all sunshine and rainbows -- it also opens up a whole new gateway for enormous abuse and exploitation. It should be obvious to anyone with a clue. :-) - - ferg p.s. I'm in Taipei at the moment, which should underscore the issues that I am talking about, et al. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP Desktop 9.5.3 (Build 5003) wj8DBQFK7Dzhq1pz9mNUZTMRAgxlAJ9FzZzBmRmoPfN4EHhSRo2g19/WvQCgzCJO 5V6IySqInkTmQlkoxSqb1tk= =COHl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- "Fergie", a.k.a. Paul Ferguson Engineering Architecture for the Internet fergdawgster(at)gmail.com ferg's tech blog: http://fergdawg.blogspot.com/ _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
