4 ms·
The registrar relying on Google Safe Browsing as a “trigger” for suspension is the most horrifying thing I’ve seen in a while. This basically makes the entire T
by iamnothere 8mo ago
The registrar relying on Google Safe Browsing as a “trigger” for suspension is the most horrifying thing I’ve seen in a while. This basically makes the entire TLD unviable for serious use.
- RHSeeger 8mo agoThe followup from that would appear to be don't use any domain that Radix controls.
- holysoles 8mo agoYeah this doesnt seem like a unique or new issue: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40195410 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40195410
- fc417fc802 8mo agoMore generally, I think it's advisable to prefer the ccTLDs of places that are politically stable. And (IMO) to view com/net/org as defacto US ccTLDs (technically they aren't but for all practical purposes they might as well be).
- WmWsjA6B29B4nfk 8mo agoWho said serious use is their business model though.
- mzajc 8mo ago.online is one of the many TLDs that charge a dollar for registration but bump the price to $30-$35 for renewal. So far, this seems like a good signal to tell apart serious TLDs and ones just preying on customers who sort by cheapest (or capitalizing on one-off phishing domains).
- volkercraig 8mo agoI had a .fun domain that I was using to host a small project and they pulled that on me, I just let it expire and killed the project.
- mcoliver 8mo agoThis is the real story. This is 100% a problem with Radix. Safe browsing targets the website not the domain. No reason a registrar should be suspending an entire account over something a company reports. Black-holing the A and CNAMEs on a subdomain? Maybe..... But even then I don't think it's the registrars place to do that. Freezing the entire account? Absolutely not.
- NewJazz 8mo agoBlackholing the a and cnames would prevent getting off the safe browsing list, as mentioned in the blog post.
- arielcostas 8mo agoGoogle allows you to use TXT to verify though, since this "feature" of disabling domains because of Safe Search is based only on web contents (A/AAAA/CNAME) they could disable those and allow TXT anyway since those are AFAIK harmless
- NewJazz 8mo agoRegistry, not registrar
- iamnothere 8mo agoThanks, yes, even worse! The registry should act on only legal orders IMHO.
- TLDRisk 8mo agoIt's the registry, not the registrar. I made a website that tries to help explain some of the lesser known nuances and risks relating to domains. The section about domain reclassification is based on first hand experience and is especially interesting IMO: https://tldrisk.com/beyond-basics/reclassification/ https://tldrisk.com/beyond-basics/reclassification/ > This basically makes the entire TLD unviable for serious use. It doesn't just make the TLD in question unusable. I think it makes most of the new gTLDs unusable. Registries can enact policies and systems like this, regardless of the detriment to registrants, due to a lack of oversight and registrant consideration by ICANN. That creates uncertainty and makes it pragmatic for registrants to simply choose the gTLDs with lots of history and precedence; .com, .org, etc.. The only two TLDs I'd personally rely on are .com (gTLD) and .ca (ccTLD).