"In fact, before DANE arrived on the scene, there was hardly a good reason to deploy it [DNSSEC]." As I recall, the problem DNSSEC aimed to solve when it was r

"In fact, before DANE arrived on the scene, there was hardly a good reason to deploy it [DNSSEC]." As I recall, the problem DNSSEC aimed to solve when it was re-proposed (it failed mutiple times previously), circa 2008, was cache poisoning. That problem can be solved other ways besides using DNSSEC under the control of third parties. Of course, today we rarely hear much about cache poisoning when DNSSEC is brought up. Instead the discussion usually revolves around other problems such as the CA system or spam. What's funny about this is that the proposed use of DNSSEC only enforces another system where potentially untrustworthy third parties are in control. Is it a coincidence this blog post was written by someone employed by Cloudflare? Another company tied to the DNS "business". This is the third post pushing DNSSEC from Cloudflare to reach the HN front page in the last month. Will there be a fourth?