4 ms·
Daydream: Browsers and email programs are shipped with "Default Allow" lists, which include only the older & higher-quality TLD's. While users can add whateve
by bell-cot 2y ago
Daydream: Browsers and email programs are shipped with "Default Allow" lists, which include only the older & higher-quality TLD's. While users can add whatever TLD's they want to the lists, that default behavior destroys 99% of the value of new & crap-infested TLD's.
- lainga 2y agoAte some cheese before dreaming: Google and MSFT (as maintainers of the dominant mail clients) start charging TLDs under the table to go on GMail/Outlook's "Default Allow" list, except, of course, the ones that Google administers
- bell-cot 2y agoSadly, yes. And no "dream" disclaimer is needed.
- sureIy 2y agoIf you want to do that you can already knock yourself out with a custom DNS. Browsers must be neutral. From the article: > .top was the most common suffix in phishing websites over the past year, second only to domains ending in “.com.” Does that mean you want to block .com domains?
- dylan604 2y ago# .top phishing websites / # .top websites total vs # .com phishing websites / # .com websites total make educated decisions
- throwaway4pp24 2y agoWhy does that matter at all? If I go and create a bunch of legitimate .top domains, is it suddenly better somehow? No, it's still the first of the list, and .com is still second.
- dylan604 2y agoyes, precisely. if you and a bazillion other people do it so that the percentage goes down. it's the fact that scammers are glomming onto a trendy TLD ruins the reputation of that TLD. If the percentage of scam is higher in one TLD over another, people will consider it a TLD used for scams. Not sure where the logic breaks down here > No, it's still the first of the list, and .com is still second. also, what do you mean .com is second? it states that .top was second to .com
- nucleardog 2y ago> Why does that matter at all? Because any action will have a negative impact on the legitimate sites and we want to maximize the effect while minimizing collateral damage. It seems you’re saying if there’s a terrorist training camp with 10 terrorists and no bystanders in it, it would be unreasonable to drop a bomb on it unless we’re first willing to level the nearby city of a million people with 11 terrorists in it because it has more terrorists. Which… no.
- TJSomething 2y agoThis made me sad when got a domain that used the TLD for a domain hack, then realized that I couldn't use it for emails.
- ErikAugust 2y ago“ top was the most common suffix in phishing websites over the past year, second only to domains ending in “.com.” So should we default not allow .com?
- BobbyJo 2y agoQuality is relative. A far larger percentage of .com domains are legitimate.
- Volundr 2y agoPer the article 0.2% of .com domains are phishing vs 4.2% of .top. Or put another way, if you have a .top domain it's about 17 times as likely to be phishing than a .com domain. .com has the most phishing domains by virtue of by far being the biggest, not because they have looser controls or are less reliable.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- arp242 2y agoOnly if you select a random domain from a list of all .com or .top domains. No one does that of course. The chance a random .top (or .com) you encounter is a phishing domain isn't so easily calculated, depends on where you see it, etc.
- ricardobayes 2y agoGot to love the mindset of the "old-school" cybersecurity folks.
- bell-cot 2y agoMS-DOS - 42 years without a remote hole in the default install!
- tristor 2y agoI already do this with NextDNS, I block all the "new" TLDs except for .io, .tv, and .ai because they're used for tech sites that are legitimate. I know that many organizations do the same, in fact it's mentioned in another comment.
- sunshowers 2y agoAll three of them are ccTLDs, so they aren't part of the "new" gTLD bucket (where .zip, .top, .xyz etc live).