Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

ICANN Sets Plan To Reinforce Internet DNS Security (networkworld.com)

Posted by msmash on from the moving-forward dept.

coondoggie shares a report: In a few months, the internet will be a more secure place. That's because the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) has voted to go ahead with the first-ever changing of the cryptographic key that helps protect the internet's address book -- the Domain Name System (DNS). The ICANN Board at its meeting in Belgium this week, decided to proceed with its plans to change or "roll" the key for the DNS root on Oct. 11, 2018. It will mark the first time the key has been changed since it was first put in place in 2010. During its meeting ICANN spelled out the driving forces behind the need for improved DNS security that the rollover will bring. For example, the continued evolution of Internet technologies and facilities, and deployment of IoT devices and increased capacity of networks all over the world, coupled with the unfortunate lack of sufficient security in those devices and networks, attackers have increasing power to cripple Internet infrastructure, ICANN stated.

"Specifically, the growth in attack capacity risks outstripping the ability of the root server operator community to expand defensive capacity. While it remains necessary to continue to expand defensive capacity in the near-term, the long-term outlook for the traditional approach appears bleak," ICANN stated. The KSK rollover means generating a new cryptographic public and private key pair and distributing the new public component to parties who operate validating resolvers, according to ICANN. Such resolvers run software that converts typical addresses like networkworld.com into IP network addresses. Resolvers include: internet service providers, enterprise network administrators and other DNS resolver operators, DNS resolver software developers; system integrators, and hardware and software distributors who install or ship the root's "trust anchor," ICANN said.

106 comments

  1. As a side effect, centralizing a decentralized net by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    And CAs are going to run this madhouse. Brilliant!

  2. Re: As a side effect, centralizing a decentralized by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Time for a swirly, nerd!!!!!

  3. Re:As a side effect, centralizing a decentralized by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The net hasn't been decentralized since the 90s. Govenments, level 1 teclcos. Most people have never seen nor every experienced a decentralized internet.

  4. Roll over by shayd2 · · Score: 1

    Play dead

    Good dog

  5. Security pros QUOTED on hosts efficacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

    "classic Windows hosts trick to block the Coinhive or Crypto-Loot domains" - https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/a-new-player-joins-coinhive-on-the-browser-cryptojacking-scene/ - BLEEPING COMPUTER

    SANS ("A related approach to the DNS issue is to create a hosts file on each system that sends requests for spyware to some place else. Both Ramu and an anonymous reader have suggested this" hosts by myself & RAMU right @ START of "malware explosion" mid 2005 on) https://isc.sans.edu/forums/di...

    Aryeh Goretsky/ESET/NOD32: hosts = good security http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7442373&cid=49747129/

    ZD NET http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-use-a-hosts-file-to-improve-your-internet-experience/ "Hosts files really shine by letting you block ads, spyware sites, malware sites, & tracking sites"

    Oliver Day (SYMANTEC/SECURITYFOCUS) http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491/

    APK

    P.S.=> See subject: For BOTH added SPEED & SECURITY... apk

  6. Re:"rotate" the key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's a key rollover event

    https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/ksk-rollover

  7. ICANN can go to hell by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    They continue to do what is best for profit, not what is best for users. Sure, this is important but don't think it isn't being driven by profit. At least there is some user benefit to this though, as opposed to their catastrophically awful decision years back to start selling gTLDs.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:ICANN can go to hell by Pascoea · · Score: 1

      I'm curious what your opposition to gTLDs are? Genuinely asking, not trying to be a smart-ass.

    2. Re:ICANN can go to hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still think that some banking consortium should buy the .bank gTLD and only allow vetted banks on it.

      That way a user could be assured that https://www.wellsfargo.bank would be the legitimate company to screw them over and take their money.

    3. Re:ICANN can go to hell by damn_registrars · · Score: 2

      My opposition to it is that when someone buys a gTLD they become their own registration authority for all domains in that domain and they set what kind of contact information is required for registrants in that range. This makes it the ultimate spammer's (or spamvertised domain owner's) harbor as it can completely remove liability and responsibility. The owner of the gTLD also has authority to hand out arbitrary numbers of domains at their own whim, again making it trivially easy for spammers to bounce around and avoid detection.

      And we cannot filter our way out of this, either. We've seen filters get demonstrably worse in recent years as the spammers get better and better at breaking them.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    4. Re:ICANN can go to hell by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      I also wrote about this in a journal entry back in 2015 when they made the terrible decision to start selling gTLDs , though of course nobody cared then either. I'm pretty sure folks here on drugedot just called me a damned communist at the time, for getting in the way of profit or something. Now they just call me a damned communist anytime I say anything at all.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    5. Re: ICANN can go to hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Communist spotted.

    6. Re:ICANN can go to hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I also wrote about this in a journal entry back in 2015 when they made the terrible decision to start selling gTLDs , though of course nobody cared then either. I'm pretty sure folks here on drugedot just called me a damned communist at the time, for getting in the way of profit or something. Now they just call me a damned communist anytime I say anything at all.

      Welcome to Slashdot. I mostly post anon but have created accounts to test and the reaction is the same. There are some technical things that are extremely polar with users having no problem wasting mod points on trying to crush it. You WILL get downvoated to hell if not having your entire post shadowbanned. People STILL don't believe me when I say TLS is broken by design and that is after posting packet dumps showing it.

      As for ICANN, having seen the original signing I have zero faith in this. If they really gave a damn about web security they would BAN anyone who had an interest in undermining it- Sandvine for example. Honestly we're going backward in time to a place when local hosts files were better. No provider spying on dns, no mitm, fast dns resolution.

    7. Re:ICANN can go to hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who decides who gets to be a bank or not? Other banks? Conflict of interest right there. National governments? Makes sense as they hand out the banking licences... but then you don't want a .bank gTLD because any smuck with a banking licence from any shithole country at all can have a .bank. So that means you should be lobbying for a .bank.us or a .bank.ccTLD for whichever country you're in. Or do it at the UN and make it an international treaty for countries who sign up to pledge they'll do a .bank.ccTLD for their own ccTLD. But wishing for a .bank gTLD is either hopelessly US-centric provincial or just plain stupid.

      There is something else worthwhile you could do, but I don't have the dosh to make it happen, so I'll just leave you guessing.

    8. Re:ICANN can go to hell by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      And we cannot filter our way out of this, either.

      Block the gTLD. Seriously how often have you legimitely needed to access to a TLD. Nike own .nike, but frankly I don't even know how to access the damn thing.

    9. Re:ICANN can go to hell by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      GDPR limits what information a whois database can record about domain owners anyway. DNS records are not the right tool for this.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:ICANN can go to hell by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      And we cannot filter our way out of this, either.

      Block the gTLD.

      You're just playing whac-a-mole then. The spammers can buy as many gTLDs as they want and essentially there are no restrictions on what they can be. Block one and another will come up. And how do you propose blocking it anyways? The emails will come from regular domains but they are spamming for domains in new gTLDs, using obfuscated domain names so you can't pick up on it easily. You can't detect a new gTLD in an email if it isn't in there and you probably don't want to block every email with a bit.ly (or similar) link.

      ICANN let the fucking foxes into the hen house and told us this is nature's way.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    11. Re:ICANN can go to hell by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      The WHOIS database is supposed to have valid contact information (even if obfuscated) for a domain so that it can be contacted in cases of abuse. With the sale of gTLDs that all goes out the window, gTLD owners can put - or omit - whatever they want in that record. Now there is no way to contact a domain owner, and no way to start a paper trail showing that you attempted to contact them. It was hard enough to do anything against prolific spammers (and owners of prolifically spamvertised domains) but now it will get nearly impossible. Couple that to my other comment about the fact that owners no longer have any responsibility if they are under a new gTLD and we have the perfect storm for spammers. And don't pretend that your email can somehow be filtered for these new domains, there is no good way to do that when they can make them at will.

      In fact their ability to make new domains - and gTLDs - at will also pushes down the S:N ratio and essentially devalues spam filters that much more.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    12. Re:ICANN can go to hell by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No I didn't mean block a specific one. I meant block the gTLDs that are being generated or rather the reverse Whitelist the country TLDs. I legitimately believe if you do that nothing will break anywhere.

      At least not yet. No doubt Google will screw this idea up so we need to get in before they start making things dependent on their TLD.

    13. Re:ICANN can go to hell by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      No I didn't mean block a specific one. I meant block the gTLDs that are being generated or rather the reverse Whitelist the country TLDs. I legitimately believe if you do that nothing will break anywhere.

      It won't break anything but I doubt it will accomplish what you're after. They will send the spam from a domain that isn't in the spamvertised gTLD (to reduce the chance of detection). Inside the spam will be a link that is obfuscated to look like a traditional .com link. Filtering by new gTLDs - or whitelisting to ignore all of them so you don't need to build a blacklist - won't get rid of those.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    14. Re:ICANN can go to hell by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      But if you can't eliminate them by whitelisting country TLDs then surely the resulting problem wasn't caused by TLDs in the first place ... Or am I not understanding your example?

    15. Re:ICANN can go to hell by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      My complaint here - and I may have wandered a bit away from it - is that there is no avenue to follow to take action against spamming and spamvertised domains if they are registered under new gTLDs. The reason for this is that the owners of the top of the new gTLDs don't have any obligation to follow any kind of registration rules for domains in their gTLDs, they can freely take invalid or even empty registration information.

      Now, of course we know that many times if you contact a registrar (or registrant) with an abuse complaint, nothing happens. Spam keeps going, the domain stays up, etc. However it is a key starting point if you want to try to take legal action against the spammer, the spamvertised domain owner, or the registrar of either. But when there is no valid contact info, you can't show that you ever attempted to do that. And when the registrar themselves has no valid info, you can't reach out to them either. ICANN has already committed to not being involved, which leaves you with nothing. You just have to accept the spam and deal with it, you can't stop it from coming.

      I will add at this point something that I say often but haven't said in this discussion.

      Spam is an economic problem

      All the filtering in the world won't stop it, spammers will keep finding ways to get around filters. The only way it can be stopped is by stopping the money; spammers will only stop if money isn't coming in. However if you don't have any valid information you can't do anything to interfere with the money flow. This is the road that ICANN is leading us down.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    16. Re:ICANN can go to hell by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      Looking at my reply again, I apologize if it looks like I was trying to come down hard on you, that was not my intention. The emphasis was largely due to the fact that slashdot discussions get closed after a certainly amount of time - and total reader attention (in terms of people reading the discussion) declines quickly as articles fall off the front page as well. I just wanted to make my point more clear since it seemed I had neglected to emphasize it earlier.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    17. Re:ICANN can go to hell by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      No probs. I didn't reply in general because I didn't have anything more to say on the topic.

      You're absolutely right, this closes off a lot of legal avenues to get at spammers and whitelisting domains only solves the problems directly for the receiver of said spam.

  8. stupid is as stupid does by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    stupid is as stupid does

  9. Re:As a side effect, centralizing a decentralized by Bengie · · Score: 2

    You can choose to not validate. It's a fundamental issue that there have to be an authority of some sort if you want to validate against an authority.

  10. Dear obsessed psycho who impersonates me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject line: Don't tell lies (especially about hosts vs. spectre/meltdown OR that I have a MacOS X version ready - I don't (yet)).!

    * SOON ENOUGH THOUGH, I will, once a pal of mine frees up some time to do the recompile - it's abstracted enough away from WinSock2 into *NIX style RAW sockets to be done on MacOS X too (only thing is, I don't OWN a Mac but would NOT MIND HAVING ONE to be honest).

    HOWEVER:IF you're NOT c6gunner? Hey What you DID post IS fact ON HOW BOGUS c6gunner is with facts that BLEW HIM AWAY (he has disappeared lately not posting all day long as per his usual so this SHAMED him) but you are NOT HELPING ME by spamming it all over the place - I ask you stop doing it, thanks!

    APK

    P.S.=> All the times you've impersonated me on this page alone thusfar are pitiful of you - don't YOU have BETTER THINGS TO DO? Apparently not & you've the DEVIL in you (idle hands ARE the devil's workshop) - now, if you're BUTTHURT over me utterly TOTALLING you on some tech topic (geeks are worse than WOMEN this way I've found, lol)? You shouldn't have TRIED me only to have yourself BEATEN DOWN SOUNDLY by "yours truly" - that's all - you only did THAT to yourself (& you KNOW it) - grow up, get over it... apk

  11. 2 questions & China... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & 2 questions you won't answer: 1.) Do hosts stop threats served by hostname (the way threats are done most) by blocking them? Yes. 2.) Do hosts speed you up 2 ways in adblocking (preventing more infection/tracking/slowdown) & via hardcoded favorite sites resolving faster + protecting vs. dns down or redirect poisoned? Yes.

    My hosts program's the only 1 that does the latter @ TOP of hosts cached in RAM (for best performance) & only 1 of its kind on Linux/BSD in easy to use flexible configuration GUI form.

    (I also did that latter part LONG before the Chinese & 1st http://theregister.co.uk/2017/... )

    APK

    P.S.-> Have you done work that's that effective doing more for less faster in kernelmode speed (cpu priority) w/ less complexity for exploit + excess overheads vs. solutions KNOWN to be security-issue riddled (like addons (souled-out to NOT work by default OR easily detected & blocked that are BYPASSABLE & EXPLOITABLE), DNS & Antivirus)? No... apk

  12. Re:"rotate" the key by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    ICANN used "roll" in their press release. https://www.icann.org/resources/press-material/release-2018-09-18-en

    Feel free to check the source material before you try and correct the author.

  13. Security pros QUOTED on hosts vs. your lies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "classic Windows hosts trick to block the Coinhive or Crypto-Loot domains" - https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/a-new-player-joins-coinhive-on-the-browser-cryptojacking-scene/ - BLEEPING COMPUTER

    SANS ("A related approach to the DNS issue is to create a hosts file on each system that sends requests for spyware to some place else. Both Ramu and an anonymous reader have suggested this" hosts by myself & RAMU right @ START of "malware explosion" mid 2005 on) https://isc.sans.edu/forums/di...

    Aryeh Goretsky/ESET/NOD32: hosts = good security http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7442373&cid=49747129/

    ZD NET http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-use-a-hosts-file-to-improve-your-internet-experience/ "Hosts files really shine by letting you block ads, spyware sites, malware sites, & tracking sites"

    Oliver Day (SYMANTEC/SECURITYFOCUS) http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491/

    APK

    P.S.=> You LOSE, liar... apk

  14. c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner shot himself down w/ his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&cid=57294670 & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & you can't c6gunner "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after you tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=57292126 for no good reason & I didn't bug you @ all!

    YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED!

    * You're FAKENAME trash you childish dishonest punk + YOU are a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57326318?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENT:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335772 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335806 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335840 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335902 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335926 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335958 from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335632 & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335732 so EAT YOUR WORDS... apk

  15. Hosts efficacy recently (partial only) alone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It's working: Neville... it's working!" See subject & results from THIS past month alone https://it.slashdot.org/commen... & https://it.slashdot.org/commen... + https://it.slashdot.org/commen... + https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... that's only recently while I've been on Linux (few months now only) & 100's of times vs. MANY other botnets/malwares etc. in the past circa 2006-early 2018 while I was on Windows: CONCRETE VISIBLE UNDENIABLE REALITY (see those links as proof).

    P.S.=> ... & that's ONLY what /. reported on (there are FAR more)... apk

  16. c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner shot himself down w/ his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&cid=57294670 & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & you can't c6gunner "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after you tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=57292126 for no good reason & I didn't bug you @ all!

    YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED!

    * You're FAKENAME trash you childish dishonest punk + YOU are a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57326318?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENT:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335772 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335806 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335840 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335902 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335926 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335958 from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335632 & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335732 so EAT YOUR WORDS... apk

  17. Registered /.ers like/use/praise my program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Here's 30 reviews by registered /.ers on quality/efficacy of Win32/64 model (Linux one's faster too) https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12478398&cid=57130680/ https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12478398&cid=57137806/ https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12478398&cid=57137868/ https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12478398&cid=57137916/ https://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12478398&cid=57137944/

    * Want more? Ask & "ye shall receive" (like 100,000++ users of my program WORLDWIDE...)

    DO THEY DO THAT FOR YOUR NON-EXISTENT WORK? No.

    I'm not here to win some "highschool popularity contest" - I'm here to WIN so everyone online does vs. threats.

    Your kind (lowest of the LOW do-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" chatterboxes) does nothing but LOSE & you know it (by comparison).

    APK

    P.S.=> Truth is, you MUST detest yourself since you HIDE behind UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous posts STALKING me constantly you loser... apk

  18. I am a big gay baby... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and I have been naughty, i soiled my nap naps... is it punishment time for me..apk

  19. c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner shot himself down w/ his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&cid=57294670 & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & you can't c6gunner "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after you tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=57292126 for no good reason & I didn't bug you @ all!

    YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED!

    * You're FAKENAME trash you childish dishonest punk + YOU are a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57326318?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENT:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335772 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335806 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335840 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335902 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335926 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335958 from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335632 & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335732 so EAT YOUR WORDS... apk

  20. On ArseHoleTechnica by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arstechnica = losers who stalked me (as you do now anonymously unidentifiably) to NTCompatible.com & Windows IT Pro magazine forums to their public dismay in Jeremy Reimer & Jay Little + Jarrett DeAngelis (who posts here on /. until I drove his ass off too) when their websites were REMOVED by their hosting providers in Shaw Canada & CrystalTech (for both email harassing me caught on a tracking ticket + stalking me & posting lies about me on them AFTER I destroyed them both PUBLICLY @ Windows IT Pro on Exchange Servers memory being freed UNHALTING them (which tells you Exchange is HEAVILY POINTER ORIENTED linked list driven, which leads to memory fragmentation that CAN halt a serverware)).

    Jay Little the "self-proclaimed 'EXCHANGE EXPERT'" HAD TO CONCEDE IT from MICROSOFT'S OWN DOCUMENTATION proving it FOR me there (where they as usual stalked me AS YOU ARE NOW)

    Peter Bright/Dr. Pizza (alias GOITERMAN, lol) can tell you what happened to his IRC server after that (lol).

    "The great arseHOLEtechnica" (not) RUN OUT of their own server chatrooms hahaha (by "yours truly").

    APK

    P.S.=> In effete retaliation they edited my posts & impersonated me on their little playpen of UNDERACHIEVER losers... apk

  21. On Thor SCHMUCK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ask him WHY his false accusation of an old ware of mine was 1st taken down to NO threat & CA sold off the SHITTY antivir he sold (as a paid pawn of theirs) & they are GONE, done. dead... lol!

    Lookup "CA Accounting Scandal" on Google - scumbags & THEIR BIRDS OF A FEATHER just go down vs. me everytime!

    APK

    P.S.=> He's nothing but a BLOATED FAT pig of a lying LOSER from podunk idaho... apk

  22. c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner shot himself down w/ his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&cid=57294670 & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & you can't c6gunner "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after you tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=57292126 for no good reason & I didn't bug you @ all!

    YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED!

    * You're FAKENAME trash you childish dishonest punk + YOU are a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57326318?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENT:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335772 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335806 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335840 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335902 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335926 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335958 from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335632 & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335732 so EAT YOUR WORDS... apk

  23. c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner shot himself down w/ his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&cid=57294670 & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & you can't c6gunner "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after you tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=57292126 for no good reason & I didn't bug you @ all!

    YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED!

    * You're FAKENAME trash you childish dishonest punk + YOU are a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57326318?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENT:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335772 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335806 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335840 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335902 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335926 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335958 from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335632 & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335732 so EAT YOUR WORDS... apk

  24. c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    c6gunner shot himself down w/ his FAKEname on a post impersonating me https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&cid=57294670 & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & you can't c6gunner "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after you tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12598948&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=57292126 for no good reason & I didn't bug you @ all!

    YOU DEMAND PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF YOU & YOU FAILED!

    * You're FAKENAME trash you childish dishonest punk + YOU are a DO-NOTHING "ne'er-do-well" CHATTERING dolt w/ ZERO to show for yourself!

    APK

    P.S.=> You say hosts are shit here https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57326318?

    50++ /.ers & security pros + RESULTS SAY DIFFERENT:

    Proof's here from /.ers https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335772 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335806 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335840 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335902 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335926 https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335958 from SECURITY PROS https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335632 & REAL RESULTS w/ hosts working vs. threats https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=12620976&cid=57335732 so EAT YOUR WORDS... apk

  25. Best way to secure yourself vs. DNS faults? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & AVOID IT via APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux/BSD h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r L i n u x . z i p

    Yields more security/speed/reliability/anonymity vs. any 1 solution (99% of threats use hostnames vs. IP address most firewalls use) more efficiently/FASTER + NATIVELY 4 less.

    Vs. "Bolt on 'MoAr' illogic-logic" slowing you hosts speed u up 2 ways: Adblocks + Hardcode fav. sites u spend most time @ vs. competition loaded w/ security bugs (DNS/AntiVir) + overheads slowing u (messagepass 'souled-out' to advertisers easily detected & blocked addons + firewall filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploitation!

    * ONLY 1 of its kind in GUI 4 Linux/BSD!

    (Better vs. Windows model in speed/efficiency/merge)

    APK

    P.S.=> Protects vs. script trackers/ads/DNS request tracking + redirect poisoned or downed DNS/botnets/malware downloads/malcript/email malicious payloads... apk

  26. Registered /.ers review of the Win64 model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your software is just fine - well written, functional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine by mmell February 17, 2017

    Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is quite valid - by JazzLad April 20, 2016

    his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant August 10 2015

    his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg September 25 2015

    I like your host file system by Karmashock September 09 2015

    that APK guy, I use his host file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015

    I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017

    * Linux model = faster/more efficient

    APK

    P.S.=> APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-1 32/64-bit for Windows https://www.google.com/search?...

  27. MacOS version available, too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's here! APK Hosts File Engine 1.0++ 64-bit for MacOS h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r M a c O S . z i p

    Yields more security/speed/reliability/anonymity vs. any 1 solution (99% of threats use hostnames vs. IP address most firewalls use) more efficiently/FASTER + NATIVELY 4 less!

    Vs. "Bolt on 'MoAr' illogic-logic" slowing you hosts speed u up 2 ways: Adblocks + Hardcode fav. sites u spend most time @ vs. competition loaded w/ security bugs (DNS/AntiVir) + overheads slowing u (messagepass 'souled-out' to advertisers easily detected & blocked addons + firewall filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploitation!

    * ONLY 1 of its kind in GUI 4 MacOS!

    (Better vs. Windows model in speed/efficiency/merge)

    APK

    P.S.=> Protects against Spectre & Meltdown + redirect poisoned or downed DNS/botnets/malware downloads/malcript/email malicious payloads... apk

  28. Hosts efficacy (partial only) vs. threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "It's working: Neville... it's working!" See subject & results from THIS past month alone https://it.slashdot.org/commen... & https://it.slashdot.org/commen... + https://it.slashdot.org/commen... + https://it.slashdot.org/commen... https://it.slashdot.org/commen... that's only recently while I've been on Linux (few months now only) & 100's of times vs. MANY other botnets/malwares etc. in the past circa 2006-early 2018 while I was on Windows: CONCRETE VISIBLE UNDENIABLE REALITY (see those links as proof).

    P.S.=> ... & that's ONLY what /. reported on (there are FAR more)... apk

  29. Security pros QUOTED on hosts efficacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "classic Windows hosts trick to block the Coinhive or Crypto-Loot domains" - https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/a-new-player-joins-coinhive-on-the-browser-cryptojacking-scene/ - BLEEPING COMPUTER

    SANS ("A related approach to the DNS issue is to create a hosts file on each system that sends requests for spyware to some place else. Both Ramu and an anonymous reader have suggested this" hosts by myself & RAMU right @ START of "malware explosion" mid 2005 on) https://isc.sans.edu/forums/di...

    Aryeh Goretsky/ESET/NOD32: hosts = good security http://it.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=7442373&cid=49747129/

    ZD NET http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-use-a-hosts-file-to-improve-your-internet-experience/ "Hosts files really shine by letting you block ads, spyware sites, malware sites, & tracking sites"

    Oliver Day (SYMANTEC/SECURITYFOCUS) http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491/

    APK

    P.S.=> Facts ARE facts (inviolate)... apk

  30. LOL! MOMMY HELP ME (golden wine)... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hohohohoho see the CLASSIC proof of that here soyboys as you DRINK the golden wine https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... straight from MY tap (of GOLDEN piss), all natural ingredients, naturally filtered (of ME pissing right into your shitbag mouths & funniest part is, you help me DO it - you LIKE it, lol!).

    Do you LIKE the taste? Obviously yes - just like folks like my hosts engine, anything I put out, even piss, is GOOD (unlike "your kind").

    Above all else though? Hey - MOMMY LOVES YOU!

    APK

    P.S.=> Hahahahaha (I think this is the BEST overall letting you SHEMALE soyboys destroy yourselves for GOLD (ask SuckerBERG about that - he's the expert as is all his kind are - heading into ZylonB & Furnace time again judging by what's happening - the PRICE of it is that, always, they don't learn)... apk

  31. Even CHINA imitated me (vs. DNS down or poisoned) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who did it 1st: China or me? I did - dates are my proof http://theregister.co.uk/2017/... w/ the FACT China rampantly STEALS U.S. Intellectual properties & military secrets!

    * IMITATION truly IS the SINCEREST FORM of FLATTERY!!!

    (... & proves hosts work vs. DNS faults in tracking you via dns request logs (since you avoid it & resolve FASTER locally using hosts) + DNS being downed OR Kaminsky REDIRECT security flaw misdirected poisoned (or vs. DNSChanger))

    APK

    P.S.=> Let me tell you ALL 1 thing: It's NOT EASY being "World-Class" like me (lol - 100,000++ users prove it for me) - enjoy the fruits of my labors for FREE + going FASTER/SAFER/MORE RELIABLY online (w/ a bit more anonymity too via my program)... apk

  32. Dear obsessed psycho who impersonates me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See my subject line: Don't tell lies (especially about hosts vs. spectre/meltdown OR that I have a MacOS X version ready - I don't (yet))...!

    * SOON ENOUGH THOUGH, I will, once a pal of mine frees up some time to do the recompile - it's abstracted enough away from WinSock2 into *NIX style RAW sockets to be done on MacOS X too (only thing is, I don't OWN a Mac but would NOT MIND HAVING ONE to be honest).

    HOWEVER:IF you're NOT c6gunner doing it as he was caught doing here https://linux.slashdot.org/com... & w/ c6gunner altering /. user's words there.

    All since I challenged c6gunner to show better work than mine he did & c6gunner can't - he's a "ne'er-do-well"!

    Right after c6gunner tried to mock me 1st https://linux.slashdot.org/com... for no good reason & I didn't bug HIM @ all!

    c6gunner DEMANDS PROOF OF OTHERS "I've yet to see you provide any evidence of that." by c6gunner on Monday March 15, 2010 @10:02PM (#31490942) ?

    I DEMANDED IT OF c6gunner & HE FAILED!

    Hey: What you DID post while IMPERSONATING me IS fact ON HOW BOGUS c6gunner is with facts that BLEW HIM AWAY (he has disappeared lately not posting all day long as per his usual so this SHAMED him) but you are NOT HELPING ME by spamming it all over the place - I ask you stop doing it, thanks!

    APK

    P.S.=> All the times you've impersonated me on this page alone thusfar are pitiful of you - don't YOU have BETTER THINGS TO DO? Apparently not & you've the DEVIL in you (idle hands ARE the devil's workshop) - now, if you're BUTTHURT over me utterly TOTALLING you on some tech topic (geeks are worse than WOMEN this way I've found, lol)? You shouldn't have TRIED me only to have yourself BEATEN DOWN SOUNDLY by "yours truly" - that's all - you only did THAT to yourself (& you KNOW it) - grow up, get over it... apk

  33. We need encrypted DNS, and guarantees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    guarantees that the major browsers and operating systems do not side-step the encrypted DNS functionality.

  34. How to check you're ready for the KSK rollover: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    https://www.icann.org/dns-resolvers-checking-current-trust-anchors

  35. I am APK the LORD of HOSTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am APK the great "LORD of HOSTS", a.k.a. AlecStaar from ArsTechnica or Alexander Peter Kowalski.

    See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux h t t p : / / I . a m . a . f u c k i n g / a s s h o l e . r e t a r d . z i p (remove spaces between characters & download).

    I am the godlike creator of various GUI front-ends for other people's configuration files.

    Don't call me out on anything unless you are willing to prove you too can write some strings to a file programmatically

    Watch as I claim I win every argument when in reality I know I lost but that won't stop me from proclaiming my victory.

    When presented with facts I rebut them with wild speculations, false support, and out of context quotes

    See me lash out at one person for 2 weeks straight and claim everyone who mocks my retarded ass is actually them.

    Bask in my debilitating mental illness

    I just don't understand why every site I post on everyone makes fun of me, it can't be because I am a shit stick but instead because they are all Ne'er-do-well SOYboy Jealous JOWIEs.

    Witness my descent into madness

    APK

  36. Read the RFC (was Re:"rotate" the key) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The professional response is: Right or wrong, RFC 5011, section 6.3 uses the term 'roll'

    Stopping to your level, the response is: read the RFCs before you write your next comment.

    1. Re:Read the RFC (was Re:"rotate" the key) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "stooping to your level", not stopping.

  37. GAYpk lmao by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    keep on HOSTing in your rear end!!!!!

  38. Re: Even CHINA imitated me (vs. DNS down or poison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are right APK you are world class, a world class loser who has known nothing but continual failure and mockery. You enjoy the fruits of welfare as you inhabit a rundown duplex that your mother left you when she went back to Poland to enjoy her retirement dream of not dealing with her retarded man child of a son. At least now you no longer have to stay in the basement like you did when she lived there.

  39. Re:As a side effect, centralizing a decentralized by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What CAs? I never had to ask a CA for my DNSSEC key, I just generated it, and pasted the public key into the DNS control panel where I got my domain.

    In fact the whole idea behind the DANE standard trying to put certificates into DNS is to allow us to do the same with SSL certificates, instead of the CA circus we have today. Unfortunately, being a standard, and browser makers being or wanting to be[1] Google, MS and Apple, none of the big browsers support it.

    [1] Mozilla being the "want to be Google".

  40. The whole idea of the Certificate Authority sucks by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 1

    One big lying corporate wingtip asshole company says that this other big lying corporate group of sons-of-bitches (and regular bitches) is to be trusted! Oh? Really? Guys, I gotta say, the whole premise of crypto-CAs is kinda stupid as long as the asshats corporations are all policing each other. Maybe *they* have some faith in that shit, but as an individual technologist (that hates corporations and corporate personhood) I have to say that the flaws in x509 crypto isn't crypto - it's the source of trust. Don't ask me to trust *ANY* corporation. If you start with that, you start with a flawed design. Fuck those people. We need a better system.

  41. Re:The whole idea of the Certificate Authority suc by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 1

    How about a system that's based on individual trust of people? Ie.. If I trust two friends and both of them say that this non-profit 501c is at least trustworthy enough to believe their website, they cryto-sign something to that affect publically? This is similar to PGP/GPG's web-of-trust. Sure, there are still some logistics problems with that, but at least it puts the trust in people not companies.

  42. Tell ya what UNIDENTIFIABLE stalker of me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your software is just fine - well written, functional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine by mmell February 17, 2017

    Your premise that hostfiles are a good way to deal with advertising and malvertising is quite valid - by JazzLad April 20, 2016

    his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant August 10 2015

    his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg September 25 2015

    I like your host file system by Karmashock September 09 2015

    that APK guy, I use his host file by rogoshen1 Tuesday March 03, 2015

    I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017

    * SEE MY SUBJECT: When YOU do better than just those good reviews of MY work (not yours that DOESN'T EXIST lol)?

    Then, talk, don't STALK - you can't MANAGE 1 to your credit.

    APK

    P.S.=> NEED 34++ more? See here https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... ... apk

  43. Dear obsessed psycho who impersonates me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear obsessed psycho who impersonates me: Don't tell lies (especially about hosts vs. spectre/meltdown OR that I have a MacOS X version ready - I don't (yet))...!

    * SOON ENOUGH THOUGH, I will, once a pal of mine frees up some time to do the recompile - it's abstracted enough away from WinSock2 into *NIX style RAW sockets to be done on MacOS X too (only thing is, I don't OWN a Mac but would NOT MIND HAVING ONE to be honest).

    APK

    P.S.=> All the times you've impersonated me on this page alone thusfar are pitiful of you - don't YOU have BETTER THINGS TO DO? Apparently not & you've the DEVIL in you (idle hands ARE the devil's workshop) - now, if you're BUTTHURT over me utterly TOTALLING you on some tech topic (geeks are worse than WOMEN this way I've found, lol)? You shouldn't have TRIED me only to have yourself BEATEN DOWN SOUNDLY by "yours truly" - that's all - you only did THAT to yourself (& you KNOW it) - grow up, get over it... apk

  44. I remember busting your balls w/ that one, lol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember busting your balls w/ that after you CRIED to whipslash "HELP ME MOMMY, downmod apk's posts to HIDE them" as you can't get the better of my points on hosts - RoTfLmAo!

    * Ah, that WAS classic & I must ask you a question: Did you LIKE that taste of my all natural ingredients GOLDEN WINE you had to DRINK (to WASH DOWN EATING YOUR WORDS too)?

    ENJOY that "tasty flavor" - you EARNED it!

    APK

    P.S.=> LMAO - classic memories - thanks for bringing that UTTER DEFEAT of yourselves back for me!

    NOW?

    Yes, it's time to get a beer now to celebrate & make MORE of that "wine" for you to DRINK since you enjoy it & for ME to LAUGH w/ my roommate who is busting laughing @ you all after that one)... apk

  45. Re:The whole idea of the Certificate Authority suc by WindBourne · · Score: 1

    Actually, I am pushing my CONgress critter to understand that we need VETTED Certificates/PPK. The only way to do that is to have brick/mortars that will vet an ID, and then either issue a certificate/private key, while serving up the public key, OR even take the public key/certificate from the vetted person . When you think about it, this does not belong in gov purview, NOR in individuals controls (that is, you vet a friend and your friend falsely vetted somebody else because they were not paying attention).

    There is really only choice on this, and it would the postal mails from each nation.

    With this approach, then gov, businesses, social media sites, etc can KNOW that if you are claiming to be someone, then you are them. For example, on /., it should be possible for me say no more ACs that are below a certain level (say 4). Now if I register a login, I should start at say 1, and increase if I am being modded up. Then if I am a login that also gave in my cert, I could then start at say 3 or even 4. Why start somebody that much higher? Because if they screw it up, then it is their only vetted login. They do not get to have multiple vetted logins. As such, they have a lot riding on their postings to make sure they are polite, etc.

    Same way with ads. If I was Facebook/Google and I get a political ad, I want to know that it is an American company, with a vetted American backing it (i.e. somebody has to be responsible) . If they can not produce both, then no posting the ad.

    --
    I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  46. Three Letters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know which ones

  47. Re:The whole idea of the Certificate Authority suc by Seven+Spirals · · Score: 1

    That rocks. Good idea, brother.

  48. Great. Liars like you we could be mod down auto by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe then you would be forced to answer for your lies, or maybe start checking the bullshit you write.

  49. Domain Squatters by muphin · · Score: 1

    How about they focus on Domain Squatters, most of the domains arent usable because they are held for advertising or overpriced to make money off them.

    --
    It's not a typo if you understood the meaning!
  50. Re:The whole idea of the Certificate Authority suc by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With this approach, then gov, businesses, social media sites, etc can KNOW that if you are claiming to be someone, then you are them.

    Nope. Stop right there. The only thing that tells you is that the system on the other end has that person's key. It conveys nothing about the person ordering the system to use it.

    I bring this up specifically because of your next statement:

    Because if they screw it up, then it is their only vetted login. They do not get to have multiple vetted logins. As such, they have a lot riding on their postings to make sure they are polite, etc.

    You are treating the key as the person themselves. The two are separate and can be used independently of each other. Placing that much of a burden on an individual's key would simply mean that they would never use the key unless forced to because, as you have already pointed out, there would be too much riding on it. To that extent, you'd get no benefit from it socially. Only the most blandest of things would be signed by the vetted key to be placed "on the record", and everything else you want to commit prejudice about would be on a non-vetted key. On the other hand you just gave every person in power now and in the future a good way of tracking, cataloging, and impersonating every person in the country. Anyone serious about trust, and who had the resources to operate a separate vetting system, would immediately distrust said system and everyone else would be suckered into it, with the occasional claims of "It wasn't me" falling on deaf ears. So all you have succeeded in doing is re-creating a web of lies like the one we have now.

    The fundamental issue of trust cannot be maintained by third parties. They can introduce others, but the ultimate decision of trust or not to trust is based on the direct two parties alone. Any attempt at circumventing this requirement because of convenience reasons, is simply blind trust, and blind trust should never be in such a position of high societal power specifically because of it's potential for abuse.

  51. Even CHINA imitated me (vs. DNS down or poisoned) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who did it 1st: China or me? I did - dates are my proof http://theregister.co.uk/2017/... [theregister.co.uk] w/ the FACT China rampantly STEALS U.S. Intellectual properties & military secrets!

    * IMITATION truly IS the SINCEREST FORM of FLATTERY!

    (... & proves hosts work vs. DNS faults in tracking you via dns request logs (since you avoid it & resolve FASTER locally using hosts) + DNS being downed OR Kaminsky REDIRECT security flaw misdirected poisoned (or vs. DNSChanger))...

    APK

    P.S.=> Let me tell you ALL 1 thing: It's NOT EASY being "World-Class" like me (lol) - enjoy the fruits of my labors for FREE + going FASTER/SAFER/MORE RELIABLY online (w/ a bit more anonymity too via my program)... apk

  52. Re:c6gunner = "Run, Forrest: RUN!!!"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're losing it lol

  53. Internet reach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It can reach only 0.5% of the Internet. The rest is dark net.

  54. Addtionally you chicken shit liar... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I do not take welfare (of ANY kind) myself & my place is FAR from "run down" & wasn't left to me by my ma (I had her write me out of her will as did my sister) + she never lived here.

    * Again - when YOU do BETTER than this https://tech.slashdot.org/comm... ? Then talk.

    APK

    P.S.=> Lastly - the FACT you have to HIDE from me behind your UNIDENTIFIABLE anonymous posts as you STALK me proves you're shit (especially your "F'd up" lies about me)... apk