.safe TLD? Probably a bad idea

F-Secure proposes a .safe TLD.

How would a global registrar be able to vet a request from a bank in, say, Nigeria? You'd think that ccTLD registrars would be in a much better position to see to it that local registrants are vetted according to local regulations, which argues for a .safe.cc.

Why just financial institutions? After they move to .safe all the other senstive services left outside .safe will become targets, so why not move all medical providers, shopping sites, etcetera to .safe too?

Confusable bank names occur in the world of brick-and-mortar anyways, and those cause problems in the Internet, so how is .safe to avoid confusables?

And so on. I think this is a bad idea. On the other hand, establishing a precedent that registrars can do better would be good!

Comments:

Post a Comment:
Comments are closed for this entry.
About

I'm an engineer at Oracle (erstwhile Sun), where I've been since 2002, working on Sun_SSH, Solaris Kerberos, Active Directory interoperability, Lustre, and misc. other things.

Search

Archives
« April 2014
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
  
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
   
       
Today