Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act

duffy.house.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 101 posts

Re: Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act

#11

Post by slashcom »

punkcoder wrote: post #4

"The Protecting Internet Freedom Act would also ensure that the United States maintains sole ownership of the .gov and .mil top-level domains, which are vital to national security." I almost did a spit take...

Yeah, it's written like if this law doesn't pass, China will be have full access to the NSA.

Re: Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act

#14

Post by random28345 »

I don't really know if the IANA should be managed by an international body, but the fact that Ted Cruz and the President of National Religious Broadcasters are in favor of this bill automatically make me think this bill is trying to prohibit speech or invade privacy. And the fact that "President, Americans for Limited Government" is supporting maintaining government control of the Internet makes it sound like standard right-wing hypocrisy. And the fact they frame the bill as an attack on Obama makes it even more suspect.

If ICANN is intentionally lobbying people like this, it automatically makes me think that it should lose the contract, regardless of the quality of their actual stewardship.

Re: Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act

#15

Post by BooneJS »

snaky wrote: post #12

> .@SenTedCruz and I introduced a bill to ensure that President Obama can't terminate U.S. oversight of the Internet https://twitter.com/RepSeanDuffy/status/740636388186546176

I'm sure some think-tank wrote this bill; thankfully there are Congressmen who can introduce.

Re: Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act

#17

Post by balls187 »

iraphael wrote: post #7
punkcoder wrote: post #4

"The Protecting Internet Freedom Act would also ensure that the United States maintains sole ownership of the .gov and .mil top-level domains, which are vital to national security." I almost did a spit take...

Yeah I don't understand the reasoning behind this at all.

My guess, this prevents DNS poisoning attacks.

Somewhere, somehow, there is critical infrastructure tied to a .gov or .mil [email/web] address.

Re: Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act

#19

Post by barsonme »

fluxsauce wrote: post #9

> The Protecting Internet Freedom Act would also ensure that the United States maintains sole ownership of the .gov and .mil top-level domains, which are vital to national security. Why? Because of hard-coded logic around those TLDs? Or is to establish that the US Military is always the top domain so canada.mil doesn't become a thing?

Without advocating either way, right now both are (afaik) fairly synonymous with the US government and its military. I could see how they'd consider it harmful if a foreign actor (or anybody, really) creates, e.g., sssa.gov which steals your information.

Re: Duffy and Cruz Introduce the Protecting Internet Freedom Act

#20

Post by mikek »

punkcoder wrote: post #4

"The Protecting Internet Freedom Act would also ensure that the United States maintains sole ownership of the .gov and .mil top-level domains, which are vital to national security." I almost did a spit take...

I agree with this. I like being able to know that a site is trustworthy based on it having a .gov domain name.
Post reply on HN