Multiple people have made the argument that having a browser show A-labels ("punycode") instead of U-labels ("regular IDN") is desirable as a way of fighting phishing.
My rebuttal has three parts:
This is an excellent audience for me to test my rebuttal. Is it solid? Can I improve it?
Cheers,
—Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada
All,
I am aware of the good work going on in the UASG to get IDN at all levels natively supported in web-adresses and email and I fully support that.
On the other hand there is darker side of the web that people want to be protected from.I just read this blog about some people that may actually find it better to see puny-code in stead of regular IDN in order to detect spam and phishing.https://ma.ttias.be/show-idn-punycode-firefox-avoid-phishing-urls/ which is an opposite view of what UASG is trying to achieve.
Does/Will the UASG have a standpoint in this matter ? Is this in scope of UASG or will we rely on the anti-virus industry or even registrars/registries to protect the world from abuses like this ?
Best regards,
Ron GeensDNS Belgium
--
--Jim DeLaHunt, jdlh@jdlh.com http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/)
multilingual websites consultant
355-1027 Davie St, Vancouver BC V6E 4L2, Canada
Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953