6 ms·
So you think crackers(>hackers) and people with bad intention will be unable to see the URLs and won't be able to do phishing easily. So, through obscurity you
by diminish 13y ago
So you think crackers(>hackers) and people with bad intention will be unable to see the URLs and won't be able to do phishing easily.
So, through obscurity you will achieve security.
Edit: or you expect users to notice phishing attempts more clearly by only displaying the domain name?
- runn1ng 13y agoI am not sure the "security/obscurity" logic applies here. It's all just GUI change, nothing is really obscured (as in not accessible). It's just more radically highlighted.
- opium_tea 13y agoIt's the latter. By only displaying the domain name users are more likely to notice a scam domain name, e.g. the Halifax.co.uk case in the parent blog post.
- diminish 13y agoThanks for understanding former or latter iquestion which I wrote at once:-)
- kiallmacinnes 13y agoI'm not sure you quite understand! The intent isn't to hide the URL from technical people like scammers... Its to hide it from nontechnical people. It's easier to train your grandparents to look at a shortened URL containing just the domain name, and having them verify that is what they expect - as all the distracting bits of the URL are gone... (Also - "crackers" refers to a very different group of people....)