Discuss mailing list

[Alex <coyo AT darkdna.net>]

"the 1% to hide their shenanigans" is a bit of a nonsequitor, but i like
this idea.

it FORCES domains to be fully secure.

although i would prefer a less centralized and more distributed
authentication and verification system, i can only be in favor of things
that make intercepting communications more difficult.


On 5/10/2012 8:44 PM, Christopher wrote:
> I don't really see an issue with it. It's not restricting the entire
> web to be like that. I also don't see how it would help "the 1% to
> hide their shenanigans". If they want to do that they can do that
> already. Not that hard to set up secret VPNs.
>
> - weblionx
>
> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Peter Green <peter AT greenpete.co.uk> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm not for a minute suggesting OpenNIC do anything like this, I just
>> wonder if this is an agreeable part of the nets being free for anyone to do
>> what they want and/or a place for the 1% to hide their shenanigans etc?
>>
>> Peter
>>
>> http://arstechnica.com/security/2012/05/my-own-private-internet-secure-tld-floated-as-bad-guy-free-zone/
>>
>>
>> --------
>> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. You may unsubscribe by
>> emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org

Attachment: 0xC34ED745.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature