Re: .secure TLD

[Stephanie Daugherty <sdaugherty () gmail com>]

Haha, yeah.

In all seriousness though, I would be all for it if the technical
requirements were a moving target that follows industry best practice and
competent security recommendations

Update the requirements yearly to be as strict as possible and give at most
1 year to be up to par.

Won't be perfect, but if we .secure can force everyone to cut down their
low hanging fruit once in a while, we'd have some step forward rather than
the feel-good joke of a marketing gimmick it's likely to become.




On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 9:23 PM, Ben April <bapril () gmail com> wrote:

> http://www.darkreading.com/authentication/167901072/security/security-management/240000187/new-i-secure-i-internet-domain-on-tap.html
>
> If they really wanted to be secure they would require the
> implementation of RFC 3514
>
> --
> Benjamin D. April
> _______________________________________________
> Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
> https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
> Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.