Re: [idn] homograph attacks

[Martin Duerst]

It is very important to be clear about the fact that neither
(Bthe .de table nor the .ch table (at http://www.switch.ch/de/id/faq/idn.html)
(Btoo close a relationship with German as a language (or French,
(BItalian, or Romansh in the Swiss case). These tables are as
(Bmuch based on user needs (which we can assume have a linguistic
(Bbasis) as on technical needs. The Swiss registry decided to
(Bkeep their iso-8859-1-based implementation, whereas the German
(Bregistry upgraded to utf-8 when they introduced IDNs.
(B
(BWhat European standards bodies spent forests of paper on was
(Ban attempt at some 'ultimately correct' linguistic-based table.
(BWhat we need for IDN are reasonably okay tables that do not
(Bneed to be 'linguistically correct'.
(B
(BRegards,    Martin.
(B
(BAt 08:28 05/02/17, Martin v. L$B�X(Bis wrote:
(B >Michel Suignard wrote:
(B >> I have seen European standard bodies spending forests of paper to try
(B >> to establish these language tables, but there have never been an
(B >> authoritative version because simply you can't.
(B >
(B >Why do you say that? DENIC is using an authorative list for .DE, see
(B >
(B >http://www.denic.de/de/domains/idns/liste.html
(B >
(B >> It is not a bad idea to have language tables to filter, but you have
(B >> to allow exception for the reasons exposed above.
(B >
(B >No, you don't. The exception you mention (H$BgB(Bgen-Dazs) is already
(B >covered in the list of characters. It might be that some company
(B >cannot use its logo as a domain name - tough luck. There might not
(B >even be a Unicode character for the logo. They will find a solution,
(B >using some sort of transliteration. If enough users complain that
(B >they want a certain, say, Greek character to be available in the
(B >.de zone, DENIC might reconsider. However, I very much doubt this
(B >will ever happen. For the .de zone, the DENIC list of characters
(B >covers all actual needs. It may be that artificial needs are not
(B >covered, but I could not care less.
(B >
(B >It is a very good idea to be more restrictive at the beginning,
(B >and the gradually become less restrictive. This is how the DNS
(B >started out - allowing only ASCII letters. With IDNA, it is
(B >possible to widen this, but that does not mean you cannot have
(B >a policy more restrictive than "full Unicode".
(B >
(B >Regards,
(B >Martin
(B >