🆕 Software Suggestion | NameCoin #1492

New Issue

2019-11-15T09:44:44Z

Mikaela commented

2019-11-15 09:44:44 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Basic Information

Name: NameCoin
Category: DNS? (Blocked by: https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/1372 & https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/1466) ?
URL: https://www.namecoin.org/

Description

It was previously removed due to some concerns that were not correct and they are addressing valid concerns. See discussion starting from https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/1273#issuecomment-553746882.

TODO

getting the blockers in category handled as currently the DNS section is moving towards ICANN-encrypted-DNS only and NameCoin only advices DNSSEC-trigger at the moment (the best case here would probably be if they started recommending encrypted ICANN DNS?)
- I wonder if DNSSEC-Trigger would be open for enabling DoT, as it's based on Unbound, but I have no idea if it does opportunistic DoT and I think enabling a hardcoded DNS server would be a good idea.
Personally I should look into @JeremyRand 's talks at 34C3 and 35C3
looking through their documentation and ensuring they don't have suggestions for using NameCoin domains without their software
- maybe even adding a warning with the relisting to not do that quoting them on it?
hopefully indepedently confirming they are doing what they say (I am not the person for this).

Assigning myself as I was the one to suggest removal and opened the PR, but please feel free to work on this and no time promises etc.

## Basic Information **Name:** NameCoin **Category:** DNS? (Blocked by: https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/1372 & https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/issues/1466) ? **URL:** https://www.namecoin.org/ ## Description It was previously removed due to some concerns that were not correct and they are addressing valid concerns. See discussion starting from https://github.com/privacytoolsIO/privacytools.io/pull/1273#issuecomment-553746882. ## TODO * [ ] getting the blockers in category handled as currently the DNS section is moving towards ICANN-encrypted-DNS only and NameCoin only advices DNSSEC-trigger at the moment (the best case here would probably be if they started recommending encrypted ICANN DNS?) * I wonder if DNSSEC-Trigger would be open for enabling DoT, as it's based on Unbound, but I have no idea if it does opportunistic DoT and I think enabling a hardcoded DNS server would be a good idea. * Personally I should look into @JeremyRand 's talks at 34C3 and 35C3 * [ ] looking through their documentation and ensuring they don't have suggestions for using NameCoin domains without their software * [ ] maybe even adding a warning with the relisting to not do that quoting them on it? * [ ] hopefully indepedently confirming they are doing what they say (I am not the person for this). *Assigning myself as I was the one to suggest removal and opened the PR, but please feel free to work on this and no time promises etc.*

👍 1

Mikaela commented

2019-11-15 10:00:54 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

I was confused by not seeing a forum thread for NameCoin, but apparently it was worth mentioning while I was writing everything with an assumption that it will be a recommended DNS tool, so I may have strictened the criteria a bit.

Do we want to call it as worth mentioning or see if #1466 will bring an opportunity to list it as recommended somewhere? We are currently missing non-ICANN DNS section and I think NameCoin is the most established candidate for that role (and I am yet to hear anything from https://github.com/opennic/opennic-web/issues/68) while excluding Tor and I2P (self-contained networks, which NameCoin AFAIK doesn't do, but would that be a good place for worth mentioning?).

There would also be some P2P DNS attempts, but I think I have encountered three different projects calling themselves as e.g. PeerDNS, so I wouldn't be open for recommending any of them as more than worth mentioning.

EDIT: Maybe we could even cross-link between non-ICANN-DNS & Self-contained networks to address the overlap of Tor and I2P and how they may be able to do the same things?

I was confused by not seeing a forum thread for NameCoin, but apparently it was worth mentioning while I was writing everything with an assumption that it will be a recommended DNS tool, so I may have strictened the criteria a bit. Do we want to call it as worth mentioning or see if #1466 will bring an opportunity to list it as recommended somewhere? We are currently missing non-ICANN DNS section and I think NameCoin is the most established candidate for that role (and I am yet to hear anything from https://github.com/opennic/opennic-web/issues/68) while excluding Tor and I2P (self-contained networks, which NameCoin AFAIK doesn't do, but would that be a good place for worth mentioning?). There would also be some P2P DNS attempts, but I think I have encountered three different projects calling themselves as e.g. PeerDNS, so I wouldn't be open for recommending any of them as more than worth mentioning. EDIT: Maybe we could even cross-link between non-ICANN-DNS & Self-contained networks to address the overlap of Tor and I2P and how they may be able to do the same things?

JeremyRand commented

2019-11-16 00:24:24 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

Coincidentally, I noticed some unacceptable wording on the r/Namecoin subreddit's description (which AFAIK predates the Namecoin developers' control of that subreddit); I've filed an issue for getting it fixed. Feel free to chime in on that issue if you have any comments on the proposed fix.

Coincidentally, I noticed some unacceptable wording on the r/Namecoin subreddit's description (which AFAIK predates the Namecoin developers' control of that subreddit); I've filed an issue for getting it fixed. Feel free to chime in on [that issue](https://github.com/namecoin/namecoin.org/issues/480#issuecomment-554579016) if you have any comments on the proposed fix.

👍 1

JeremyRand commented

2019-11-16 00:36:44 +00:00

(Migrated from github.com)

I guess I may be thinking of https://bit.namecoin.org/browse.html listing "Volunteer-Run DNS Servers" and while it says "For quick testing" and "Using this for everyday browsing or anything sensitive is strongly discouraged...", I fear listing it as an option may send the wrong signal ("If I am not doing anything special, I don't need to do this") and I don't know how much people using NameCoin domains or third party DNS servers perform research and if they ever hear that their favourite DNS server is not recommended.

I figured out why that text was still there without me knowing about it. The page in question was migrated to https://www.namecoin.org/dot-bit/browsing-instructions/ a while back, and subsequently I had that section of the page removed. But it looks like we neglected to replace the old URL with a redirect, and there seem to still be some pages on our site that link to the old URL. I've filed an issue about fixing this. Thanks again for pointing that out.

> I guess I may be thinking of https://bit.namecoin.org/browse.html listing "Volunteer-Run DNS Servers" and while it says "For quick testing" and "Using this for everyday browsing or anything sensitive is strongly discouraged...", I fear listing it as an option may send the wrong signal ("If I am not doing anything special, I don't need to do this") and I don't know how much people using NameCoin domains or third party DNS servers perform research and if they ever hear that their favourite DNS server is not recommended. I figured out why that text was still there without me knowing about it. The page in question was migrated to https://www.namecoin.org/dot-bit/browsing-instructions/ a while back, and subsequently I had that section of the page removed. But it looks like we neglected to replace the old URL with a redirect, and there seem to still be some pages on our site that link to the old URL. I've filed an issue about fixing this. Thanks again for pointing that out.

👍 1

This repo is archived. You cannot comment on issues.

1 Participants

Due Date

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: privacyguides/privacytools.io#1492