[149709] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Dear RIPE: Please don't encourage phishing
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu)
Sun Feb 12 14:57:15 2012
To: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:59:36 +0900."
<4F377168.9040903@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 14:55:48 -0500
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--==_Exmh_1329076548_2778P
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Sun, 12 Feb 2012 16:59:36 +0900, Masataka Ohta said:
> The problem is greekbank.gr is spoofable as greekbank.gr.
That would be the .gr registry's problem then. They could take the same
solution as the .ua registry -force lowercase and allow all-latin or all-greek
names.
Oh, what do you know... they *do* do something similar.
https://grweb.ics.forth.gr/tomcat_docs/AP592_012_2011_.pdf
See page 5 and 6, in particular:
8. Any [.gr] Domain Names that are homographs of a [.gr] Domain Name
already assigned shall be automatically reserved for the Holder of the
above assigned [.gr] Domain Name and shall be activated following the
Holder's submission of an activation declaration to the Registry.
So how do you spoof greekbank.gr with greekbank.gr under those rules?
> No, the simple solution against such a simple problem is to
> use proper font, because all the people know that '0' and 'o'
> are different characters and treat them differently.
Well then, if all that's required is a "proper font", what is the problem with
your Saitoh families? You said they were "represented by 4 similar but
different characters, which is distinguished by people named "Saitoh" but not
distinguished by most others," Why can't *they* use a "proper font" that makes
the difference between the 4 characters recognizable? After all, *they*
know the 4 characters are different and can treat them differently, right?
(And no, it's *not* "different for kanji" - it's the exact same problem and you
know it. In both cases, (I/l and your Sai issue), the problem is similar
glyphs. Don't bother replying to suggest a fix for the lower-l/upper-I issue
unless the *same* fix applies to your Sai issue).
--==_Exmh_1329076548_2778P
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001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=tS9C
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--==_Exmh_1329076548_2778P--
