Re: New DNS vulnerability: political overreach

[Barry Greene via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org>]

Kevin, 

Please take this to ICANN. This is not a technical issue. If you are a business in anywhere in the world who knowingly 
ignores legal request for other parts of the world _AND_ ignore the “bottom up” community driven ICANN governance 
processes, then you are an idiot. 

www.icann.org <http://www.icann.org/>

Barry

> On Jul 20, 2026, at 01:01, Kevin Tillery via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
>
> This is indeed. Politics has an annoying tendency to cause technical problems, the current one being how to protect 
> the DNS from political attack.
>
> There's nothing new about this - TLS became ubiquitous because of the Snowden leaks. Nobody said "get this TLS talk 
> off my list because it's political"
>
> That's why I'm asking if there's something similar people can do to secure DNS? Probably not at the moment and 
> certainly not easily?
>
> Although since it isn't about routing I'm not fully sure it's on-topic for NANOG and might be better suited for 
> somewhere like IETF?
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On 19 July 2026 18:05:29 CEST, Jay Acuna via NANOG <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 19, 2026 at 8:08 AM Andy Ringsmuth via NANOG
> > <nanog () lists nanog org> wrote:
> > > "Appropriate topics include: routing; broad-based engineering problems/issues/solutions; outages; performance 
> > > measurement; evolving wide-area technologies; exchange points; traffic engineering; operational experience; ISP 
> > > security; and trouble ticket systems."
> >
> > The technical issue would be susceptibility of All database to
> > tampering by any authorities
> > who hold legal supremacy/jurisdiction over whichever person(s) or
> > organizations are responsible for specific TLDs,
> > or even the actual org responsible for that registry, for any reason,
> > against the wishes of the domain holder.
> >
> > Even if the domain holder exists outside that jurisdiction or can
> > legally operate under different rules.
> >
> > While this can be a serious technical issue; I don't believe there is
> > anything network operators can do about it.
> > You could consider distributed alternatives such as IPNS of the IPFS
> > protocol a cryptographic-based name system,
> > Tor hidden services, etc.
> >
> > Your best option might be to register your own domains under multiple
> > ccTLDs while ensuring that there
> > is no overlap amongst the registry operators or registrars between any
> > of the chosen TLDs and domains.
> >
> >
> > > Andy Ringsmuth
> > --
> > -JA
> > _______________________________________________
> > NANOG mailing list 
> > https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/LZL2ZERUH5FDFUM2ML7R53QRIM46Y3UZ/
> _______________________________________________
> NANOG mailing list 
> https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/VL4QKNMCOV4MQIPRQHJOSA43Y6GWSVL4/

_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list 
https://lists.nanog.org/archives/list/nanog () lists nanog org/message/7PIXXVN53B5J2PQZAJNJ6JAJ2WG5OP7Q/