.garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
discourse.ifin.network
.garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
1–10 of 33 posts
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#2I had no idea the .garden TLD even existed. Having just checked Porkbun, it seems like they go for $1.54 which is pretty cheap. No wonder they're being abused.
If you have a cheap TLD of course bad actors will buy a bunch.
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#3It is absurd to consider a TLD bad just because it's cheap and its names were registered by some bad people. It's a bad case of stereotyping. Filters need to be better than this. There are plenty of good names within a TLD.
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#4A concrete counterexample: plantura.garden is a large, reputable German-language gardening magazine / brand, and probably exactly the kind of legitimate site one would expect on .garden.
So while the abuse numbers may well justify treating newly registered / low-reputation .garden domains with suspicion, blanket-blocking the entire TLD seems like it would create real collateral damage.
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#5It is absurd to consider a TLD bad just because it's cheap and its names were registered by some bad people. It's a bad case of stereotyping. Filters need to be better than this. There are plenty of good names within a TLD.
Further to your point, it harms the existing wonderful sites like https://radio.garden/—which has been featured on HN several times over the past few years.
> First-year TLDs under $2 is one of the best indicators of likely abuse. Some TLDs like .xyz are truly fighting abuse while others feign ignorance.
I don't understand this. The first year being discounted (or free) helped .me, and .xyz in the past. This is one year of data. Surely more time is needed?
> It is unlikely that there are valid business reasons for network environments to allow .garden domains;
What do you mean? What is this likelihood based off of?
> highly recommend defenders completely block the .garden top-level domain, and allowlist items as needed.
Holy overreaction, Batman.
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#6It is absurd to consider a TLD bad just because it's cheap and its names were registered by some bad people. It's a bad case of stereotyping. Filters need to be better than this. There are plenty of good names within a TLD.
Further to your point, it harms the existing wonderful sites like https://radio.garden/—which has been featured on HN several times over the past few years. > First-year TLDs under $2 is one of the best indicators of likely abuse. Some TLDs like .xyz are truly fighting abuse while others feign ignorance. I don't understand this. The first year being discounted (or free) helped .me, and .xyz in the past. This is one y…
>Holy overreaction, Batman.
I don't see it as that much different than people setting up IP blocks at the country/ASN level.
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#7It is absurd to consider a TLD bad just because it's cheap and its names were registered by some bad people. It's a bad case of stereotyping. Filters need to be better than this. There are plenty of good names within a TLD.
Further to your point, it harms the existing wonderful sites like https://radio.garden/—which has been featured on HN several times over the past few years. > First-year TLDs under $2 is one of the best indicators of likely abuse. Some TLDs like .xyz are truly fighting abuse while others feign ignorance. I don't understand this. The first year being discounted (or free) helped .me, and .xyz in the past. This is one y…
Just another data point about this, not an argument for (or against) blocking a TLD, but personally I wouldn't register an .xyz again, due to what I presume is related to them having to fight abuse. I still have one site on there and have migrated another off.
My domain was flagged for abuse (it's a static site with a daily word game, no ads or anything else) and the TLD took it down. Not my registrar or host, the TLD itself. There was no communication on this, it took some effort to work out what even happened, and appealing was a pretty blind process of claiming to have fixed the issue and issuing proof (which felt a bit strange to fabricate proof that it was fixed, since no issue existed to begin with - I sent a screenshot of the page or something, I can't recall) and hoping they'd unblock it, with no communication at all beyond a place to send such a claim.
They did unblock it, and while I am sympathetic to them having to fight abuse, I still moved away from them.
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
Further to your point, it harms the existing wonderful sites like https://radio.garden/—which has been featured on HN several times over the past few years. > First-year TLDs under $2 is one of the best indicators of likely abuse. Some TLDs like .xyz are truly fighting abuse while others feign ignorance. I don't understand this. The first year being discounted (or free) helped .me, and .xyz in the past. This is one y…
>Holy overreaction, Batman. I don't see it as that much different than people setting up IP blocks at the country/ASN level.
Which is also bad.
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#9It is absurd to consider a TLD bad just because it's cheap and its names were registered by some bad people. It's a bad case of stereotyping. Filters need to be better than this. There are plenty of good names within a TLD.
It's not just the price, but also how "legitimate" the registrars are and how well they deal with abuse.
Here's an anecdote: I know someone who insisted on using a .tk domain for legitimate business purposes for many years. When I heard of this, I immediately asked "isn't that the TLD managed by a shady company that gives domains away for free and then steals them back if they become popular?" He insisted this did not affect him, as he was a legitimate customer who had been paying for the domain for over a decade.
Fast forward a few years, the company behind the TLD (Freenom/OpenTLD) went under due to their shady business practices, he lost the domain, and was told he had to register it again at a new registrar for a much higher price to recover it.
Re: .garden TLD's change to a bad neighborhood
#10It is absurd to consider a TLD bad just because it's cheap and its names were registered by some bad people. It's a bad case of stereotyping. Filters need to be better than this. There are plenty of good names within a TLD.
[dead]