There is Handshake [1] which is getting significant [2] adoption [3].
[2] https://twitter.com/opera/status/1476841607005622273?s=20
[3] https://www.namecheap.com/about/press-releases/21-09-22/name...
[2] https://twitter.com/opera/status/1476841607005622273?s=20
[3] https://www.namecheap.com/about/press-releases/21-09-22/name...
More's the pity! If the Handshake DNS root heist works, it'd open up new business models for all of us. I had been looking forward to minting ARPCoin and charging everyone to join their WiFi networks.
Handshake domains are only accessible by a tiny percent of people, make stuff like HTTPS very difficult[1], and no matter how devices eventually use Handshake, you'll always need to have a domain on a normal TLD because there will always be devices (like TVs and old phones) that will not support it.
And what benefit do you get anyways? A custom TLD? There's already so many new TLDs but most domains are on gTLDs or ccTLDs because thats what people recognize. Even Google and Apple barely use theirs. Ownership? Not really. Handshake only manages TLDs. Buying a subdomain (like you can on Namecheap) doesn't happen on the blockchain, the owner of the TLD can take it away anytime. Say what you want to say about ICANN, but they do have rules (such as contingency plans) that new TLD owners have to follow. In what world is buying a handshake subdomain from an unknown person beholden to nobody better in any way?
[1] https://www.namecheap.com/support/knowledgebase/article.aspx...
380m+ users seems significant to me.
> Handshake domains are only accessible by a tiny percent of people
Actually, NextDNS which is a Firefox resolver also supports Handshake, so I imagine it's not a tiny percent of people.
> make stuff like HTTPS very difficult
Additionally, HTTPS is completed by Handshake since it removes the need for a "trusted certificate authority" which, as many articles have mentioned as of late, is not so trusted [1][2].
> you'll always need to have a domain on a normal TLD because there will always be devices (like TVs and old phones) that will not support it.
TVs and old phones can support handshake since it's just regular DNS protocol.
> And what benefit do you get anyways?
You will cryptographically own your own name.
> A custom TLD?
A name all-inclusive. Hard stop.
> There's already so many new TLDs but most domains are on gTLDs or ccTLDs because thats what people recognize.
I've been around for a long time -- the internet has evolved and continues to evolve. People change quickly.
> Ownership? Not really. Handshake only manages TLDs.
Cryptographically owning things is likely a more constant ownership than a 'binding ownership' by a legal contract in some jurisdiction.
Some of the statements you made about subdomains may or may not be true, but it's not any worse than today and likely better since there will be more options of TLD owners to choose from should one choose to purchase a TLD.
[1] https://github.com/imperviousinc/beacon-ios
[2] https://blog.mozilla.org/security/2021/12/09/improved-qualit...
Adoption by default is a huge deal and you can't ignore it by saying that something "can" use it if you configure your router properly or this and that. The vast majority of people will never change it. Re. Firefox, I just tried switching it to NextDNS, but it seems like the default NextDNS resolver does not resolve Handshake domains.
Putting aside all the issues with DANE as a replacement to HTTPS, no browser supports it. This is why I don't use my handshake TLD for my personal/internal sites either.
Look, actual Handshake adoption would benefit me quite a bit, since I own a great TLD. I will keep an eye on adoption, but its very clearly a long road, and the project itself has a number of issues besides just adoption. It's cool, but you have to be realistic.
https://help.nextdns.io/t/83hmv0v/what-is-handshake
> Putting aside all the issues with DANE as a replacement to HTTPS
The issues with DANE no longer exist when the blockchain serves as the root of trust, thus completing a chain of trust in a way that a third party certificate authority is unneeded. It's DANE without the potential for backdoor.
> Look, actual Handshake adoption would benefit me quite a bit, since I own a great TLD. I will keep an eye on adoption, but its very clearly a long road, and the project itself has a number of issues besides just adoption. It's cool, but you have to be realistic.
I agree there is a lot to do still, but the adoption Handshake has is more than significant in the context of alternate roots given it's adopted by so many DNS registrars and natively integrated into large userbase services and software. But no, it's not in Chrome... yet.
How is radically improved transparency in the WebPKI --- what you linked to --- evidence that Handshake is more trustworthy than the WebPKI?