3 ms·
> Just using websites of the form barclaysfoo.co.uk is obviously unsafe, because it's rife with phishing opportunities since you're training customers to accep
by anoncake 7y ago
> Just using websites of the form barclaysfoo.co.uk is obviously unsafe, because it's rife with phishing opportunities since you're training customers to accept these kinds of domains and then some phisher goes out and registers barclaysblah.co.uk and users don't think twice about entering their credentials there.
This is a case for a better structured web, not for giving up meaningful hierarchies altogether. It shouldn't be possible to register a .co.uk domain unless you are a company that is registered in the UK and can be sued. Ideally companies also shouldn't be allowed to use TLD not designated for them so barclays.awesome etc. is suspicious. A namespace like .bank.uk would be even more secure.
> Subdomains off barclays.co.uk are also not great, because cookies can be shared up to the domain level (intentionally or accidentally),
There is no reason we can't treat barclays.co.uk like a top level domain for some purposes, using a mechanism like the public suffix list.
> But I like cyde.dev better, so I'll be migrating stuff over to it.
So the new TLDs encourage people to migrate, thus changing URLs and frequently breaking them by not bothering with redirects.
- CydeWeys 7y agoI'm not following this argument, because the kind of reorganization you're asking for here is impossible, whereas simply creating new TLDs is relatively easily and has thus actually occurred. There are how many millions of already-existing .co.uk sites that aren't companies registered in the UK, so how is your suggestion even possible? This horse has long left the barn.
- anoncake 7y agoCreating .bank.uk is not impossible. Nor is cleaning up .co.uk -- it would be painful, of course, but sometimes you have to rip off the band-aid.
- CydeWeys 7y agoYou are proposing linkrot on an unimaginable scale. You're talking about breaking the Web, on purpose. It will never happen, and for damn good reasons. This horse left the barn several decades ago.
- anoncake 7y agoLinks rot all the time. The web is already broken.
- CydeWeys 7y agoYour proposal would break it an order of magnitude more, easily. Also keep in mind that domain names are treated as property in most jurisdictions. You cannot take away someone's foobar.co.uk domain just because you want to retroactively change policies. It's not even possible from a legal standpoint.
- anoncake 7y ago> Your proposal would break it an order of magnitude more, easily. Considering that the vast majority of links die within a few years, that isn't even possible. > Also keep in mind that domain names are treated as property in most jurisdictions. That's a policy that can easily be changed.
- isthisnametaken 7y ago> It shouldn't be possible to register a .co.uk domain unless you are a company that is registered in the UK That's literally what .ltd.uk is for, and no-one cares about it
- CydeWeys 7y agoThere are lots of these TLDs with restrictive registration policies based on who you are and they tend not to do very well because they're too much hassle and they suffer from a chicken and egg problem; not many people use them so there's little added benefit since the average user isn't aware that they're more restrictive, and then since it doesn't really matter to users potential new registrants don't bother with the increased hassle and cost.
- anoncake 7y agoThe problem here is that the hassle-free alternatives exist and are open to entities for which another namespace has been designated in the first place.