8 ms·

The Handshake Network wants to reinvent DNS

72 points by rasengan 7y ago

ktpsns 7y ago
I stopped reading when the term "blockchain" arised. (Jokes aside, the paywall made me stopping reading) > Old and busted: DNS over HTTPS. New hotness: DNS over blockchain https://twitter.com/dobes/status/1164412915648086016 https://twitter.com/dobes/status/1164412915648086016 Original quote from https://blog.fefe.de/?ts=a3a04f1b https://blog.fefe.de/?ts=a3a04f1b
- m-p-3 7y ago
  So you stopped at Blockchain just above the title? ;) Here's the IPFS [1][2] and Outline [3] copy after bypassing the paywall 1: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmX6TTwqk4H6mKoKXHRGHYu22GZaCim9VBNtGdrqWcS8Cm/ https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmX6TTwqk4H6mKoKXHRGHYu22GZaCim9VBNtGdr... 2: https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmX6TTwqk4H6mKoKXHRGHYu22GZaCim9VBNtGdrqWcS8Cm/ https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmX6TTwqk4H6mKoKXHRGHYu22GZ... 3: https://outline.com/96CLhZ https://outline.com/96CLhZ
tmikaeld 7y ago
I remember this was hot about 3 years ago. Nothing will happen unless it's integrated into the major browsers. Afaik, no one is planning that.
- swalsh 7y ago
  You wouldn't integrate it in the browsers, but instead you'd probably want it on the OS level.
  - camdenlock 7y ago
    Exactly. With all of these proposed DNS replacements, support at the OS level is the first step to true adoption. Perhaps Linux-based OSes would be the places to start...
goofyduck 7y ago
This will catch on faster than IPv6...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
skywhopper 7y ago
How would blockchain make anything “unstoppable”? Malicious DNS records could still end up in the chain via other attacks. How does such a system handle establishing ownership of a namespace in the first place?
- m-p-3 7y ago
  More like uncensorable, as unless you blocks all the nodes in the blockchain, the ledger will eventually makes its way to those who wants to download it.
equalunique 7y ago
Mental note: Do some research later to see how this is different from namecoin.
peeters 7y ago
> We use the DNS because most humans are bad at keeping track of long numbers. I almost feel the need to challenge that these days. While it's absolutely true as far as the original intention went, and is true to a limited amount today, I think the days of most people typing domain names into the location field of their browser is largely over. Google search is the modern DNS when we're talking about that purpose. Today, I think DNS is much more about the permanence of an address, not whether it's memorable.
- jazzyjackson 7y ago
  Agreed that it’s about changing what IP and address resolves to, 32 bit IPs don’t have to be harder to memorize than a phone number. In fact most IP addresses can be represented as a 10 digit decimal notation and last I checked chrome will resolve this “phone number” representation into the traditional quad-octet
  - partialrecall 7y ago
    During most of the period in which memorizing phone numbers was common, most people weren't memorizing 10 digit numbers. Rather, local calls to your neighbors required you only remember 4 digits when you all shared the same three digit prefix. And if you didn't share a prefix but shared an area code, you only had to memorize 7 digits. For the calls most people were making most of the time, memorizing 4 was typical and 7 was occasional. This did begin to change before the rise of phone number storage tech, but it doubtlessly spurred the adoption of that tech.
  - omni 7y ago
    > most IP addresses can be represented as a 10 digit decimal notation Can't all ipv4 addresses be represented this way, since it's equivalent to a 32 bit int?
    - jazzyjackson 7y ago
      You’re right, I can’t remember why I was thinking I ran into 11 digits...
p4bl0 7y ago
In practice, DNS is already sort of not-centralized (even if it would be incorrect to call it decentralized). One can decide to use specific name servers that do not follow ICANN's rules. See for instance the OpenNIC project. They even operate non-standard TLDs. Using a blockchain has little benefits. And I believe it's energy cost is really not worth it in the current situation.
- DoctorOetker 7y ago
  not every block chain needs to be energy intensive. check algorand for example. the blockchain winter is over.
- ttjjcc 7y ago
  DNS is hierarchical, but that doesn't matter because it's effectively controlled by ICANN and big name registrars. "permissionless" is what we need, but you can only get there through decentralization. This is a perfect usecase for blockchain, because we need permissionless writes to a distributed ledger. The energy costs of running the blockchain would likely be equivalent if not less than the current system (what's the energy cost associated with running Godaddy?). An alternative would be to scrap the idea of memorable domain names all together, and move toward something like QRcodes + tor like public keys + petnames or similar.
coolspot 7y ago
Very similar to Ethereum Name System, down to Vickrey auction method.
dang 7y ago
Discussed a month ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20625561 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20625561
godelski 7y ago
Didn't someone last year do an analysis where they thought Summit (250 PFLOPs) could do a 51% attack on Bitcoin? My major concern would then be what about Aurora (1ExFLOPs)[1], Frontier (1.5ExFLOPs)[2], and similar computers? If the big draw is to avoid censorship this seems like a big concern. Potentially making us all more vulnerable because someone like China, Russia, or America could decide that they want to spend all those computing resources on an attack. It's not like these machines are a significant portion of the national budget and are really dwarfed by military budgets. We're only talking a few hundred million dollars to build and tens to operate. I like the idea in principle, but is this worked out? [0] https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/olcf-resources/compute-systems/summit/ https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/olcf-resources/compute-systems/sum... [1] https://aurora.alcf.anl.gov/ https://aurora.alcf.anl.gov/ [2] https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/frontier/ https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/frontier/
parliament32 7y ago
DNS-blockchain was already done, 8 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin
nikisweeting 7y ago
https://github.com/Monadical-SAS/solana-dns https://github.com/Monadical-SAS/solana-dns Solana-based DNS would have performance benefits and also not wast the incredible amount of energy that traditional blockchains do.

72 points by rasengan 7y ago

I stopped reading when the term "blockchain" arised. (Jokes aside, the paywall made me stopping reading) > Old and busted: DNS over HTTPS. New hotness: DNS over blockchain https://twitter.com/dobes/status/1164412915648086016 https://twitter.com/dobes/status/1164412915648086016 Original quote from https://blog.fefe.de/?ts=a3a04f1b https://blog.fefe.de/?ts=a3a04f1b

m-p-3 7y ago
So you stopped at Blockchain just above the title? ;) Here's the IPFS [1][2] and Outline [3] copy after bypassing the paywall 1: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmX6TTwqk4H6mKoKXHRGHYu22GZaCim9VBNtGdrqWcS8Cm/ https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmX6TTwqk4H6mKoKXHRGHYu22GZaCim9VBNtGdr... 2: https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmX6TTwqk4H6mKoKXHRGHYu22GZaCim9VBNtGdrqWcS8Cm/ https://cloudflare-ipfs.com/ipfs/QmX6TTwqk4H6mKoKXHRGHYu22GZ... 3: https://outline.com/96CLhZ https://outline.com/96CLhZ

tmikaeld 7y ago

I remember this was hot about 3 years ago. Nothing will happen unless it's integrated into the major browsers. Afaik, no one is planning that.

swalsh 7y ago
You wouldn't integrate it in the browsers, but instead you'd probably want it on the OS level.
- camdenlock 7y ago
  Exactly. With all of these proposed DNS replacements, support at the OS level is the first step to true adoption. Perhaps Linux-based OSes would be the places to start...

goofyduck 7y ago

This will catch on faster than IPv6...

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

skywhopper 7y ago

How would blockchain make anything “unstoppable”? Malicious DNS records could still end up in the chain via other attacks. How does such a system handle establishing ownership of a namespace in the first place?

m-p-3 7y ago
More like uncensorable, as unless you blocks all the nodes in the blockchain, the ledger will eventually makes its way to those who wants to download it.

equalunique 7y ago

Mental note: Do some research later to see how this is different from namecoin.

peeters 7y ago

> We use the DNS because most humans are bad at keeping track of long numbers. I almost feel the need to challenge that these days. While it's absolutely true as far as the original intention went, and is true to a limited amount today, I think the days of most people typing domain names into the location field of their browser is largely over. Google search is the modern DNS when we're talking about that purpose. Today, I think DNS is much more about the permanence of an address, not whether it's memorable.

jazzyjackson 7y ago
Agreed that it’s about changing what IP and address resolves to, 32 bit IPs don’t have to be harder to memorize than a phone number. In fact most IP addresses can be represented as a 10 digit decimal notation and last I checked chrome will resolve this “phone number” representation into the traditional quad-octet
- partialrecall 7y ago
  During most of the period in which memorizing phone numbers was common, most people weren't memorizing 10 digit numbers. Rather, local calls to your neighbors required you only remember 4 digits when you all shared the same three digit prefix. And if you didn't share a prefix but shared an area code, you only had to memorize 7 digits. For the calls most people were making most of the time, memorizing 4 was typical and 7 was occasional. This did begin to change before the rise of phone number storage tech, but it doubtlessly spurred the adoption of that tech.
- omni 7y ago
  > most IP addresses can be represented as a 10 digit decimal notation Can't all ipv4 addresses be represented this way, since it's equivalent to a 32 bit int?
  - jazzyjackson 7y ago
    You’re right, I can’t remember why I was thinking I ran into 11 digits...

p4bl0 7y ago

In practice, DNS is already sort of not-centralized (even if it would be incorrect to call it decentralized). One can decide to use specific name servers that do not follow ICANN's rules. See for instance the OpenNIC project. They even operate non-standard TLDs. Using a blockchain has little benefits. And I believe it's energy cost is really not worth it in the current situation.

DoctorOetker 7y ago
not every block chain needs to be energy intensive. check algorand for example. the blockchain winter is over.
ttjjcc 7y ago
DNS is hierarchical, but that doesn't matter because it's effectively controlled by ICANN and big name registrars. "permissionless" is what we need, but you can only get there through decentralization. This is a perfect usecase for blockchain, because we need permissionless writes to a distributed ledger. The energy costs of running the blockchain would likely be equivalent if not less than the current system (what's the energy cost associated with running Godaddy?). An alternative would be to scrap the idea of memorable domain names all together, and move toward something like QRcodes + tor like public keys + petnames or similar.

coolspot 7y ago

Very similar to Ethereum Name System, down to Vickrey auction method.

dang 7y ago

Discussed a month ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20625561 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20625561

godelski 7y ago

Didn't someone last year do an analysis where they thought Summit (250 PFLOPs) could do a 51% attack on Bitcoin? My major concern would then be what about Aurora (1ExFLOPs)[1], Frontier (1.5ExFLOPs)[2], and similar computers? If the big draw is to avoid censorship this seems like a big concern. Potentially making us all more vulnerable because someone like China, Russia, or America could decide that they want to spend all those computing resources on an attack. It's not like these machines are a significant portion of the national budget and are really dwarfed by military budgets. We're only talking a few hundred million dollars to build and tens to operate. I like the idea in principle, but is this worked out? [0] https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/olcf-resources/compute-systems/summit/ https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/olcf-resources/compute-systems/sum... [1] https://aurora.alcf.anl.gov/ https://aurora.alcf.anl.gov/ [2] https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/frontier/ https://www.olcf.ornl.gov/frontier/

parliament32 7y ago

DNS-blockchain was already done, 8 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namecoin

nikisweeting 7y ago

https://github.com/Monadical-SAS/solana-dns https://github.com/Monadical-SAS/solana-dns Solana-based DNS would have performance benefits and also not wast the incredible amount of energy that traditional blockchains do.