DNS filtering: absolutely the wrong way to defend copyrights

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/05/dns-filtering-absolutely-the-wrong-way-to-defend-copyrights.ars

by evo_9 • 15 years ago

30 15 15 years ago

Natsu3• 15 years ago

This raises an interesting point: that by promoting the adoption of DNSSEC, we can preempt such legislation technologically.

SoftwareMaven• 15 years ago

Until the government demands a back-door into it and thereby undoes any security benefits we had gained.

davidu3• 15 years ago

DNSSEC doesn't prevent censorship in the DNS like the kind being suggested in Protect IP.

-David

Natsu3• 15 years ago

But it does stop them from poisoning (if not from blocking) results we get from DNS servers that are still trustworthy.

code_duck2• 15 years ago

Yeah, but it will work great for arbitrary censorship! Like how searching 5 year olds at the airport doesn't fight terrorism. It's apparent that these methods don't fit the alleged purposes, so my assumption is that the real goals are unspoken.

lotusleaf1987• 15 years ago

Security theater. It's just a simulation of safety.

code_duck2• 15 years ago

I don't really believe in that 'security theater' concept either, though the media has been nearly unanimous in labeling the TSA's abuses as such.

rcthompson• 15 years ago

On the plus side, I now understand why every critical system in every Sci-Fi movie has a self-destruct button. It was probably legislated in.

sorbus• 15 years ago

> But, more ominously, they can also have it changed for them by a website: "It is likely, if not inevitable, that infringement sites would use the same strategy, allowing a single site to instantly, silently, and permanently change a user's DNS path and evade DNS filtration and filtering."

That's very worrying, as presented. However, slightly later, it suggests that this either requires user interaction (still worrying) or the download of software (not worrying):

> "Those promoting pirate sites will simply create websites and postings that ask: 'Frustrated by getting filtered when you try to watch movies? Click here to fix the problem'," the article notes.

Would someone clarify whether this refers to downloading software to change DNS servers or a mechanism by which websites can actually do so? Of course, by Occam's razor, this is referring to software, since if a method for websites to change the DNS server of a visiting computer without user interaction existed then attacks of this nature would be extremely common.

biturd• 15 years ago

What would be the safest non .com/.net/.edu domain to buy in the future? I have a feeling the .com is going to become devalued in the coming year. I no longer will build a site that I believe could ever be popular under a .com.

I would rather give my money to .ly, which while they have some rather draconian rules because of their religion, I have a strong feeling they would tell the US to eff off if they were asked to take a site down at the DNS level.

I hope more and more businesses move their domains, and perhaps even their operations to other countries to avoid all this nonsense. This is less money in the US, less taxes to the US, and we will learn our lesson. Money talks, and usually pretty quick.

Imagine if facebook.com became facebook.ly all of a sudden. Granted, they would never do this to facebook even if child porn were on the front page for months. Not all of us are facebook though.

skymt• 15 years ago

.me is a popular choice for sites fleeing US TLDs. Montenegro isn't being actively targeted by IP lobbyists, and the registry is marketing the TLD worldwide.

dsl• 15 years ago

Pick a domain where you have to actually contact the NIC in-country to register a domain.

Most of the .me, .eu, .asia, .ws, etc. are operated by US companies (Afilias, VeriSign, Neustar) under licence and subject to US law.

DNS filtering: absolutely the wrong way to defend copyrights

Related Stories