3 ms·
> If safe browsing only blocked the subdomain when you have a certain threshold of "safe" subdomains, then attackers would just have a sufficient number of "saf
by codetrotter 3y ago
> If safe browsing only blocked the subdomain when you have a certain threshold of "safe" subdomains, then attackers would just have a sufficient number of "safe" subdomains.
If a website has a.example.com, b.example.com, foo.example.com, baz.example.com and they serve malware on baz, I’m saying put that subdomain on the bad list. If they serve malware from many subdomains, block the whole domain.
The issue is that Google blocked a whole domain for just one bad subdomain. That seems too strict, and is very sad for all of the users of that domain.
- danpalmer 3y agoSo to distribute malware, I can buy a domain, set up a thousand subdomains, but only put malware on one of them. Then when that gets found I can move the malware to another, and so on, always being able to trivially work around blocking? At least when done at the domain level there's a cost involved for getting a new domain, which disincentivises the creation of many malware hosting domains.