4 ms·
In what way are you more secure then when someone uses a .com domain? In both cases it is easy to register a url and turn into a malicious site. It really seems
by cptn_brittish 9y ago
In what way are you more secure then when someone uses a .com domain? In both cases it is easy to register a url and turn into a malicious site. It really seems you are blackholing parts of the web for no good reason except to exempt yourself from actually performing a security check on the sites on the assumption all other tld's are safe.
- dredmorbius 9y agoWrong question. Risk. Reward. Administrative cost. The first of these I blocked when I looked at the domain and realised that the TLD were registering any old line noise. I'm not going to bother sorting that. Search for other experience turned up Blue Coat. I subscribe to blocklists, and they update periodically. There are other levels of protection. When a TLD is 99.9% malware or scams, it's far easier to block it outright. Registrars should take responsibility for what they're registering. Not my problem.
- cptn_brittish 9y agoMy experiance with symantec web protection (which I assume will use the same blocklists they are talking about) is that it has a ridiculous false positive rate and when I was still in High School they had blue-coat installed and it had a worse false positive rate. I would be very careful about running blacklists from those companies aside from anti-ad blocklists.