4 ms·

Ugh, when I saw the HN headline about this TLD I thought it belonged to ING Group, just like .barclays and .chase belong to their corporate owners. Just shows h

by heipei 3y ago

Ugh, when I saw the HN headline about this TLD I thought it belonged to ING Group, just like .barclays and .chase belong to their corporate owners. Just shows how suited this TLD is for phishing...

s3p 3y ago
Don't they sell .zip TLDs now too?
- rekoil 3y ago
  Yes, they do, huge mistake ...but a lot of fun!
  - lolsowrong 3y ago
    Explain why it’s a huge mistake, please.
    - wholinator2 3y ago
      I think the idea is ambiguity between a zip file from your coworkers website and an entirely separate phishing website which downloads an entirely different zip file with a malicious payload. Anything that introduces unnecessary and previously unforseen ambiguity to the olds is just another path to filling the internet with scams
      - Clamchop 3y ago
        Browser vendors should just splash users with one of those click-through security warnings. Make it bright yellow. I'd be very entertained by drama from owners of those domains, but in my opinion, such a thing would be completely justified.
        afavour 3y ago
        Here’s the problem: the biggest browser vendor is the one selling the domains!
      - eru 3y ago
        Well, we also have .com as a common extension on Windows machines?
    - snypher 3y ago
      A link reading attachment.zip is no longer a 'safe' file but a eg browser window.
    - mholt 3y ago
      Check out familyphotos.zip
      - canadianfella 3y ago
        [dead]
- lucb1e 3y ago
  I hate that mentioning example.zip now turns into a link in modern chat programs. At least link preview can be disabled... Also .py is annoying but that one I can understand more why it reasonably needs to exist.
- jeroenhd 3y ago
  I don't get it, and I'm sure some people fall for the scams, but .com has been a dangerous file format since before the internet became common and that hasn't been much of a problem either. My guess is that it'll only be a matter of time before .png and .jpg will be TLDs.
  - rekoil 3y ago
    If someone is allowed to make .xlsm a TLD I'm 100% quitting the internet.
simondotau 3y ago
If I were the lawyers at ING, I would be sending Google it cease-and-desist with regards to selling any domains with banking related terms. I actually think they would have a reasonably strong claim.
- gtirloni 3y ago
  And grammar teachers would sue ING?
  - eru 3y ago
    On what grounds? ING can sue on grounds of owning a trademark.
- resolutebat 3y ago
  https://bank.ing https://bank.ing is ING Bank.
  - qup 3y ago
    Suuuuure it is!
  - expertentipp 3y ago
    yeah, right
- expertentipp 3y ago
  To be honest both cases are equally strong. Trademark by a bank, and English gerundial suffix. I want to see their lawyers knife fight in a ring while burning piles of cash, it would be an entertaining self resolving problem!

by heipei 3y ago

Ugh, when I saw the HN headline about this TLD I thought it belonged to ING Group, just like .barclays and .chase belong to their corporate owners. Just shows how suited this TLD is for phishing...

s3p 3y ago

Don't they sell .zip TLDs now too?

rekoil 3y ago
Yes, they do, huge mistake ...but a lot of fun!
- lolsowrong 3y ago
  Explain why it’s a huge mistake, please.
  - wholinator2 3y ago
    I think the idea is ambiguity between a zip file from your coworkers website and an entirely separate phishing website which downloads an entirely different zip file with a malicious payload. Anything that introduces unnecessary and previously unforseen ambiguity to the olds is just another path to filling the internet with scams
    - Clamchop 3y ago
      Browser vendors should just splash users with one of those click-through security warnings. Make it bright yellow. I'd be very entertained by drama from owners of those domains, but in my opinion, such a thing would be completely justified.
      - afavour 3y ago
        Here’s the problem: the biggest browser vendor is the one selling the domains!
    - eru 3y ago
      Well, we also have .com as a common extension on Windows machines?
  - snypher 3y ago
    A link reading attachment.zip is no longer a 'safe' file but a eg browser window.
  - mholt 3y ago
    Check out familyphotos.zip
    - canadianfella 3y ago
      [dead]
lucb1e 3y ago
I hate that mentioning example.zip now turns into a link in modern chat programs. At least link preview can be disabled... Also .py is annoying but that one I can understand more why it reasonably needs to exist.
jeroenhd 3y ago
I don't get it, and I'm sure some people fall for the scams, but .com has been a dangerous file format since before the internet became common and that hasn't been much of a problem either. My guess is that it'll only be a matter of time before .png and .jpg will be TLDs.
- rekoil 3y ago
  If someone is allowed to make .xlsm a TLD I'm 100% quitting the internet.

simondotau 3y ago

If I were the lawyers at ING, I would be sending Google it cease-and-desist with regards to selling any domains with banking related terms. I actually think they would have a reasonably strong claim.

gtirloni 3y ago
And grammar teachers would sue ING?
- eru 3y ago
  On what grounds? ING can sue on grounds of owning a trademark.
resolutebat 3y ago
https://bank.ing https://bank.ing is ING Bank.
- qup 3y ago
  Suuuuure it is!
- expertentipp 3y ago
  yeah, right
expertentipp 3y ago
To be honest both cases are equally strong. Trademark by a bank, and English gerundial suffix. I want to see their lawyers knife fight in a ring while burning piles of cash, it would be an entertaining self resolving problem!