• DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    What? What do you mean “DNS space”? Classic DNS does not have any security, no encryption and no signatures.

    DNSSEC, which adds signatures, is based on TLDs, not any geography or country. And it is not yet enabled for most domains, though I guess it would be for google. But obviously EU does not control .com.

    And if you mean TLS certificates, those are a bit complicated and I already explained why forging those would be problematic and not work on Chrome, though it could be done.

    • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yes I mean tls certs as those control what dns records are considered valid. The Eu should control which tls are considered valid within its territory and that should be considetedpart of their security apparatus. It’s crazy irresponsible to have left that up to unaccountable private foreign entities. This is what would make it difficult to control their own independant version of the dns namespace.

      • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        No. At the end of the day, I control which certificates I consider valid. Browsers just choose the defaults. There is no way I quietly let some government usurp that power, considering how easy to abuse it is.

        Yes I mean tls certs as those control what dns records are considered valid.

        No they don’t. That is not what TLS really does. But I guess close enough.

          • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 hours ago

            Even more reason to have relatively neutral organizations transparently curate the list of trusted CAs. While I am sure governments also closely monitor the process and would step in if they deemed it a threat.

            • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 hours ago

              Google is a threat. They should know they can be subverted if they continue in their ways with the questionably ethical human experimentation (for instance, undisclosed A/B testing including full context)

                  • DreamlandLividity@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 hours ago

                    So we come full circle. The government having the ability to impersonate a site is exactly what I believe must not happen.

                    If the EU wants to create search.eu or any other search site, more power to them. I certainly wouldn’t use it, but hey, if you want to trust them, you can.

                    If they want to block google search… Eeeeh… I guess that is fine?

                    But they shouldn’t be able to create a fake certificate for google.com or any site for that matter, not only allowing them to impersonate the site, but also intercept encrypted traffic between users and that site.

                    So no. Governments should not control the TLS infrastructure.