ICANN seeking input on ceding control of WHOIS privacy to governments [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: ICANN seeking input on ceding control of WHOIS privacy to governments [pdf]

#21

Post by logfromblammo » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 3:30 PM UTC

msrpotus wrote: post #15

Larrikin wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What purpose does the Whois email serve if most people want to directly send it to their spam box? Seems like they should just scrap it.

What if there’s something illegal, violating copyright, etc. on the site? Or to take a less legal example, what if someone’s site is hacked? You need some way of getting in touch with the owners.

The snail-mail address of the registered agent would suffice. The cost of postage is sufficient to deter the least-determined spammers. And the most-determined spammers would be deterred by the most potentially profitable targets having legal departments handling the mail received by their registered agents.

Re: ICANN seeking input on ceding control of WHOIS privacy to governments [pdf]

#22

Post by mr_spothawk » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 3:46 PM UTC

exelius wrote: post #19

thathappened wrote: post #13

Anyone else think things like this, dns, ssl authority, and lots more a better areas to focus blockchain tech toward?

Everyone ignores that in order for a blockchain to work, there needs to be a governance model that weeds out bad actors. In finance markets, this is somewhat ok because the governance model of laissez-faire economics (a common mental model to apply to finance) is simply “buy at your own risk”. That governance model won’t work for something like DNS — if control of a DNS name is maliciously reassigned, there would nee…

cough block chain for value is here cough

cough block chain for contracts is almost here cough

cough blockchain for governance is next cough

Re: ICANN seeking input on ceding control of WHOIS privacy to governments [pdf]

#23

Post by icebraining » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 3:52 PM UTC

zaarn wrote: post #11

cptskippy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As well as any legitimate emails coming to you regarding your domain.

I don't think I ever received legitimate forms of coherent communication over my WHOIS emails.

I have - the WHOIS verification email!

https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/approved-with-specs-20...

Re: ICANN seeking input on ceding control of WHOIS privacy to governments [pdf]

#24

Post by icebraining » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 3:55 PM UTC

f055 wrote: post #2

This sounds like the whois privacy that we all know and have to pay for, will be mandatory to implement on all domains everywhere, becoming free?

That's the impression I got from reading the EFF report on it; the GDPR makes WHOIS essentially impossible.

[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/01/europes-gdpr-will-forc...

Re: ICANN seeking input on ceding control of WHOIS privacy to governments [pdf]

#25

Post by EGreg » Thu, Mar 01, 2018, 4:09 PM UTC

zaarn wrote: post #6

bharrison wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Think so? "The public WHOIS would include an anonymized email address or a web form from which messages could be forwarded to the registrant email address."

That's far better than the current system. Atm I have to expose my email domain, which means some spammers just fire a broadside of this crap. When it comes from an anonymized email forwarder, I can easily just redirect it into the spam folder.

Why not just set up your own email forwarder on such an address that you set up for all your domains?

Re: ICANN seeking input on ceding control of WHOIS privacy to governments [pdf]

#26

Post by mr_spothawk » Fri, Mar 02, 2018, 4:38 AM UTC

exelius wrote: post #19

thathappened wrote: post #13

Anyone else think things like this, dns, ssl authority, and lots more a better areas to focus blockchain tech toward?

Everyone ignores that in order for a blockchain to work, there needs to be a governance model that weeds out bad actors. In finance markets, this is somewhat ok because the governance model of laissez-faire economics (a common mental model to apply to finance) is simply “buy at your own risk”. That governance model won’t work for something like DNS — if control of a DNS name is maliciously reassigned, there would nee…

> Any real, reliable blockchain solution is not going to be the decentralized authority model that Bitcoin has, it’s going to be a tiered trust authority in the same way that SSL roots work today.

it's going to be very difficult to code for:

"we, as a network, accept this authority... to a degree"

I still think it can be done.