• sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    For most security - centric websites, the right name is ASCII only.

    For any that aren’t, people would have the opportunity to become familiar with the correct fingerprint over time and have a chance to notice a difference.

    I’m curious to hear if you think there is a better way. What I’m saying is unlikely to ever be implemented in a browser and I’m not trying to convince you or anything, just say why I personally would appreciate it.

    • darklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      For most security - centric websites, the right name is ASCII only.

      Are you perhaps by any chance American?

      I’m curious to hear if you think there is a better way.

      I think a much better solution would be to shield end users from this problem entirely, by having all registries refuse to register such confusable names, as recommended by Unicode:

      https://www.unicode.org/reports/tr46/tr46-34.html#Registries

      • sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        Yep. Do you all have important URLs with Unicode characters?

        I think it would be great if registries screened registrations for confusable names. Even if they did though, I wouldn’t expect them to succeed 100%

        • darklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Do you all have important URLs with Unicode characters?

          Yes.

          I wouldn’t expect them to succeed 100%

          Me neither, but I find that path to be much more likely to be successful than hoping that “people would have the opportunity to become familiar with the correct fingerprint over time and have a chance to notice a difference” would ever have any meaningful impact.