[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [idn] homograph attacks



All:

And an interesting follow-up by Paul Hoffman:

http://LookIt.proper.com/archives/000302.html#000302

Gary.


But of course, Paul has solved the problem again.

I know this to be true, because I recognize his manner of presenting the solution. First, Paul to divides people into two groups; 1) those who know everything about the net, which includes Paul and other "God's of the Internet" -- those who invented the Internet (I guess this includes Al Gore); 2) everyone else in the world who doesn't know squat, of which I'm a member.

Of course, those like me are asked for our opinion, but when we give it we are often met with "Well... it's clear that you didn't read such and such draft" and then are presented with tens of pages (if not hundreds) of pages of Geek speak to comprehend. If that doesn't shut us up, then he is most happy to tell us to "Look up the word 'hubris' in the dictionary" because we are questioning his view of the world -- but I digress.

Second, after his introduction, which leaves no doubt that you either are smart and agree with him, or... well, you get the picture.

But, sometimes, that just doesn't solve the problem and I often find myself back to "If it looks like a duck, and it sounds like a duck..."

Now I realize that after reading Paul's solution, that he really doesn't want to be "pulled back in" to the fray. After all, he has already provided us with the tablets and now wants to lead his people around in the desert away from all of this, but, unfortunately, we keep having problems with the commandments he left -- like what's this "Thou shall not mix scripts without doing it right" thing?

I think we can all agree with Paul that the "Quick" answers don't work. But, you know, I don't understand Paul's "better solutions" either. Let's take a look.

The first one has a pretty image of a "hover pop-up" that shows a domain name where ASCII characters are in Cyan and Cyrillic characters are in Yellow -- that looks pretty smart.

Let's see, if I understand the solution, we use Cyan for ASCII and Yellow for Cyrillic, and... -- hey just how many scripts are there and how many colors are available? You know, a single domain name might take on the look of one of my granddaughter's fruit-loop bracelets. So, I'm not sure how that would work.

Of course, one might just use white for "normal" scripts and yellow for everything else. That might work. That way everyone in the world could have their own script appear "normal" whereas mixed scripts would be... ah mixed, right? Of course, those countries who use mixed scripts, would always have colored domains -- but there can't be too many of those, right?

Of course, the colored domain name solution doesn't address the section 508 issue with regard to the disabled, but then again, who thinks of the needs of those people, right? Oh, and don't forget the blinking domain thing that Paul mentioned either -- am sure that would go over well in the disabled market, not to mention that every web page designer I know thinks that a blinking anything is a real "no-no". But then again, Paul is not a designer.

Oh, and don't forget the lawyers of the person who owns a mixed script (liek caf

But Paul is also not super at understanding the problem his solution creates. At present we have more than a couple of browsers and OS's to contend with. My "Browser Cam" count shows 24 different browser/os combinations (if you don't count Flash). So Paul's solution would require the creation of 24 different "plug-in's" . I don't know who's going to do that, but I doubt that it's going to get done.

Of course, there's also the problem in distribution of those plug-in's to zillions of computers -- (zillions is OK, because Paul used that number). I don't understand how that is going to work either.








-- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://sperling.com/