schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de to Not The Onion@lemmy.worldEnglish · 3 days agoA researcher bought noreply.net. Companies started sending him secrets.arstechnica.comexternal-linkmessage-square60linkfedilinkarrow-up1369arrow-down12
arrow-up1367arrow-down1external-linkA researcher bought noreply.net. Companies started sending him secrets.arstechnica.comschnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de to Not The Onion@lemmy.worldEnglish · 3 days agomessage-square60linkfedilink
minus-squaregrue@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·3 days agoOooh, looking at RFC2606 (mentioned by your link), the .invalid TLD seems like an appropriate choice here. (Changing “deleted” users’ emails to an invalid TLD still isn’t the right solution, though.)
minus-squareJakeroxs@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·24 hours agoUntil 20 years down the line .invalid becomes a valid TLD and all hell breaks loose lmao
minus-square/home/pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·3 days agoBetter than an un-reserved domain name or tld
Oooh, looking at RFC2606 (mentioned by your link), the
.invalidTLD seems like an appropriate choice here.(Changing “deleted” users’ emails to an invalid TLD still isn’t the right solution, though.)
Until 20 years down the line .invalid becomes a valid TLD and all hell breaks loose lmao
Better than an un-reserved domain name or tld