Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
1–10 of 86 posts
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#2[deleted]
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#3How about the risk of parking TLDs on Handshake? Say, by taking every .{lastname} out there just in case someone wants it in the future...
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#4How about the risk of parking TLDs on Handshake? Say, by taking every .{lastname} out there just in case someone wants it in the future...
Doesn't that risk already exist with the current system?
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#5How about the risk of parking TLDs on Handshake? Say, by taking every .{lastname} out there just in case someone wants it in the future...
Could certainly happen, but there's a couple mechanisms that mitigate this:
1) The network will only allow you to bid on a name if it has been at least `hash(name) % 52` weeks after mainnet launch. Squatters cannot purchase all of the good names on day 1.
2) The network limits the total number of domain renewals that can occur each block. Eventually this will lead to fee pressure and make renewing 10,000s of domains expensive for squatters.
3) It's possible to atomically trade names for coins on-chain, so squatters that self-custody will likely do this to make selling their names easier. The names will end up with someone that actually uses it
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#6Also posted on reddit with the owner trying to answer some questions: https://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/d5iv4y/decentralizi...
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#7How about the risk of parking TLDs on Handshake? Say, by taking every .{lastname} out there just in case someone wants it in the future...
Doesn't that risk already exist with the current system?
Depends on the cost. Domains used to be free but nobody gave a shit because nobody used the Internet.
Ah, the good old days.
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#8No company in its right mind is going to trust its brand to this.
Megacorps want an administrative solution--a clear target they can throw money and lawyers at if something goes south--rather than blockchain, where a disgruntled employee can run off with the private key and hose the domains for perpetuity.
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#9No company in its right mind is going to trust its brand to this. Megacorps want an administrative solution--a clear target they can throw money and lawyers at if something goes south--rather than blockchain, where a disgruntled employee can run off with the private key and hose the domains for perpetuity.
Author of the post here. I agree with you on this, at least in the early days. I don't expect any major company to switch to Handshake or even adopt Handshake. Realistically, adoption will happy in a bottoms-up fashion, starting with people in the jurisdictions that need it most. For instance, Spain shut down IPFS gateways when Catalonians used it to advertise the Catalan independence referendum. If the IPFS gateway was on Handshake, it would have been much more difficult to take down the gateways.
https://www.reddit.com/r/ipfs/comments/728tt4/note_ipfs_gate...
Re: Handshake: Decentralizing DNS to Improve the Security of the Internet
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't that risk already exist with the current system?
Depends on the cost. Domains used to be free but nobody gave a shit because nobody used the Internet. Ah, the good old days.
I think that arbitrage disappeared pretty quickly. Domainers have been around for a long time...