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

foo@bar.com

bar.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 301 posts

Re: foo@bar.com

#181

Post by [deleted] »

jdxcode wrote: post #130
giantrobot wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've personally run into the .zip problem thanks to browser's omni address/search/chocolate bars. I intend to search for a zip file whose name I know but the browser "helpfully" realizes the term includes no spaces and ends in dot something and attempts to treat it as a URL. A simple workaround is to add a preceding space or something like inurl: but that's isn't an automatic behavior so whoever owns mlpdwarfporn.zip…

if we could go back I wonder if it would be better if we had required a leading dot in domain names ".google.com"

[deleted]

Re: foo@bar.com

#182

Post by Aearnus »

dTal wrote: post #177
kbenson wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using a question make in front of the term is traditionally how some browsers trigger search. They usually have a jeybconbe to add it automatically. For example, in firefox and chrome ctrl-l will clear the URL bar and put the cursor and focus there to take you to the location you enter, and ctrl-k will do similar but pre-fill the location bar with a preceding '?' so a search is triggered on the input. These shortcuts…

What's a "jeybconbe"? It's a googlewhack for this thread.

My best guess is that it looks like a typo for "keycombo".

Re: foo@bar.com

#183

Post by nullsense »

Wistar wrote: post #92
davemtl wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed. I've owned `invaliddomain.com` for almost 20 years. You'll be surprised how many use it for testing. One morning I woke up to 30,000 e-mails from Sony Japan with PDFs attached of scanned hand-written part orders. Something similar with Boeing sending me backup notifications. I notified each of these companies about their configuration through their official channels, only to be told "no, it's your server doin…

I owned forexample.com for 15 years or so and saw all kinds of mail but the most persistent was a record company owner who, from time-to-time, wrote semi-deranged angry emails demanding that I turn the domain over to him. I always had grand plans for the domain but never acted and, a couple years ago, I forgot to renew and the domain is now in someone else's hands. I don't miss it, especially the record company guy.

I wish there were a site that all this stuff could be posted so we can all share in the fun. Always entertaining hearing about this stuff.

Re: foo@bar.com

#184

Post by schwartzworld »

CydeWeys wrote: post #151
captn3m0 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ICANN should never have assigned .zip, there's just too much potential for abuse, confusion giving away a common extension as a TLD.

There's a lot of overlap between file extensions and TLDs though. .py, .sh, and .app are some more examples (but a fully exhaustive list would be in the dozens if not hundreds). At some point you have to just treat them as the separate namespaces that they actually are (and not somehow try to block a TLD from being used as a file extension, or vice-versa). Besides, accidentally resolving a file extension to a TLD is…

not to mention .com

Re: foo@bar.com

#185

Post by tony101 »

JoshTriplett wrote: post #167
CydeWeys wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you give me your email I can send you a message from my _lastname_@ work address, which you can then match up with published media I've done under my name, e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBkX30Cj7Bw and https://security.googleblog.com/2017/09/broadening-hsts-to-s... Or you can look at the matching username on GitHub ( https://github.com/CydeWeys ) and see that I'm a member of the Google org and owner of the…

> If you give me your email I can send you a message from my _lastname_@ work address Not disputing your account in any way, but please don't propagate the widespread myth that only people who own an email address can send from that email address. If you wanted to use your well-known email address as authentication, you'd need to offer to reply to a mail sent to that address.

You could check whether the email passed SPF, DKIM, and DMARC checks. Google has certainly implemented these for their SMTP servers. If all of the tests pass, you can be pretty certain that the sender is the owner of the address.

Re: foo@bar.com

#186

Post by kzrdude »

srtjstjsj wrote: post #111
jeroenhd wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only proper way to do internal DNS is to register a domain. Even a free one will do. The more people follow decent practices at home, the fewer businesses will accidentally break because on of the admins thought it'd be alright because it works for them at home. If you set your DNS domain correctly you can also save yourself some typing effort because DNS will automatically append the network name (so you can htt…

It's terrible that the spec doesn't reserve something like .localdomain that is unregisterable so that DNS servers can use it for internal use. .test doesn't quite cut it.

You could propose this to be implemented, surely?

Re: foo@bar.com

#187

Post by kzrdude »

CydeWeys wrote: post #31
eli wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think anyone is paying millions of dollars for domains any more. Maybe low six figures.

Domain names are going for more money than ever before. The record for most expensive sale (publicly known anyway) was hit just last year. 30 million dollars for voice.com: https://domainnamewire.com/2019/06/20/yes-voice-com-is-the-m...

it's counterintuitive, with the flora of TLDs

Re: foo@bar.com

#188

Post by bialpio »

lozaning wrote: post #136
CydeWeys wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll be honest, even I do this when it's a form that has an email requirement but that I don't otherwise care about at all. I'm not gonna sign myself up for spam. Sometimes example.com and whatever other testing TLD that comes to mind is blocked because they want something that could plausibly be a real email address, so I give them something that could plausibly be a real email address, like asfgjklahsfgjklh@asdfogh…

That's why I own fakefakefake.email it gives me some minor pleasure to provide this email address to people who insist on having an email address for me.

I use @mailinator.com for that purpose, it's oddly satisfying to put "lolno@mailinator.com" / etc in those places.

Re: foo@bar.com

#189

Post by themacguffinman »

chrismeller wrote: post #4

Something that I’m surprised a lot of devs don’t know; there are official domains you’re supposed to use for documentation, testing, etc. They are specifically reserved by IANA for these purposes. Originally I think it was just example.com, but they now have a list of all them: https://www.iana.org/domains/reserved

A bit off topic, but I lament that these reserved domains are becoming less and less useful for testing web applications. I don't think you can acquire regular SSL certificates for reserved TLDs like "test.", yet an increasing number of browser features only work in "Secure Contexts" (ie. HTTPS only).

Chrome treats "localhost." as a Secure Context by default, a nice convenience, but for the other reserved TLDs you have to either self-sign (a fairly complex and laborious process that doesn't necessarily work on locked down devices) or register a non-reserved domain with a regular SSL certificate that points to a test IP.

Re: foo@bar.com

#190

Post by retox »

davemtl wrote: post #54
chrismeller wrote: post #4

Something that I’m surprised a lot of devs don’t know; there are official domains you’re supposed to use for documentation, testing, etc. They are specifically reserved by IANA for these purposes. Originally I think it was just example.com, but they now have a list of all them: https://www.iana.org/domains/reserved

Indeed. I've owned `invaliddomain.com` for almost 20 years. You'll be surprised how many use it for testing. One morning I woke up to 30,000 e-mails from Sony Japan with PDFs attached of scanned hand-written part orders. Something similar with Boeing sending me backup notifications. I notified each of these companies about their configuration through their official channels, only to be told "no, it's your server doin…

I had my.homepage.com for a while back in the early 2000s, unfortunately I wasn't allowed to monetize it, but looking at the referral logs was always interesting.
Post reply on HN