FWIW the article states this only applies for specific MITM cases, but yeah, this is kinda bullshit. If you want to push back against this, find somebody near

FWIW the article states this only applies for specific MITM cases, but yeah, this is kinda bullshit. If you want to push back against this, find somebody near Kobe, Japan in the next few weeks who can go to this open session [1] and explain the problems, and provide some alternative solutions. I agree with rocqua that the Registrar needs to have a more active role in securing DNS. I think we need new standards of control between domain owners, registrars, DNS TLDs, and certificate authorities. I, as a domain owner, should be able to provide signed changes to the Registrar, and to entities further down the chain, so that just because someone gets access to my account on a service provider, they can not change anything without my private key. Delegation and revocation of other keys can also be handled for large organizations (we do that today with DNS). [1] https://meetings.icann.org/en/kobe64 https://meetings.icann.org/en/kobe64