schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de to Not The OnionEnglish · 17 days agoA researcher bought noreply.net. Companies started sending him secrets.arstechnica.comexternal-linkmessage-square60linkfedilinkarrow-up1377arrow-down12cross-posted to: [email protected][email protected][email protected]
arrow-up1375arrow-down1external-linkA researcher bought noreply.net. Companies started sending him secrets.arstechnica.comschnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de to Not The OnionEnglish · 17 days agomessage-square60linkfedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected][email protected][email protected]
minus-squaregruelinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up3·16 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-square/home/pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.comlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·16 days agoBetter than an un-reserved domain name or tld
minus-squareJakeroxs@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·14 days agoUntil 20 years down the line .invalid becomes a valid TLD and all hell breaks loose lmao
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.)
Better than an un-reserved domain name or tld
Until 20 years down the line .invalid becomes a valid TLD and all hell breaks loose lmao