Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Industry Groups Bid To Control New Business-Specific TLDs

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the concentrated-interest-diffuse-objections dept.

Security 55

Gunkerty Jeb writes "Two financial industry groups, the American Bankers Association (ABA) and the Financial Services Roundtable, announced on Thursday that they have applied to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) to operate two top level Internet domains, .bank and .insurance, on behalf of the financial services industry. In a published statement, the groups said that they had applied for .bank and .insurance to 'provide the highest security for the millions of customers conducting banking and insurance activities online.' The move comes as the U.S. Congress is set to begin hearings on e-banking fraud on Friday."

cancel ×

55 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Well then... (2)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169313)

If they can get this, then the precedent has been set and I'll be a shoe-in for .loser
(And if I can't get that, then I'll go for .momsbasement)

just wait for the humor (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169357)

The victims of fraud sites are not going to know the difference between us.bank and usbank.bank and us.ba.nk, for example. Surely there aren't any kind of unintended consequences here, right? /sarcasm.

Re:just wait for the humor (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40170127)

Whoever wins this will control .bank, and will only allow banks to use it, so to use a slightly more specific version of your example, jpmorgan.bank, jp.morgan.bank and jpmorganbank.bank will all either be owned by JPMorgan, or won't resolve. No, it does not resolve the issue of jpmorganba.nk, but I think the average person understands TLDs slightly more than you think, even if unconsciously. Also, both of these groups are fairly major players, and I wouldn't be surprised to see fairly widespread adoption once this goes live, which can make user education easier. You can teach your mother than "anything .bank is good, any banking site not .bank is bad" a lot easier than you can teach her that jpmorgan.com is good, jpmorganbank.com is bad, morganstanleybank.com and morganstanley.com are good, but morgan-stanley.com is bad (these examples are fictional, I don't feel like looking up what banks own what domains, but it's pretty representative of the current situation. Even working in the field, I usually have to actually read the cert if I'm typing in a bank domain to make sure I didn't fuck up).

Re:just wait for the humor (1)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 2 years ago | (#40174777)

how about banks in non-us countries.

Re:just wait for the humor (1)

frenchbedroom (936100) | more than 2 years ago | (#40177743)

.banque in french
.pankki in finnish
.banco in spanish
.banka in czech
.banki in icelandic

:)

... yeah ok, it might be a problem for crimean tatar, croatian, danish, dutch, hungarian, maltese, norwegian, polish, swedish, turkish and volapük, which all use the word "bank"... and the Slovenians call it banka just like the Czechs... oh well.

Re:just wait for the humor (1)

poetmatt (793785) | more than 2 years ago | (#40181731)

Yep. We're right back to the basic problem. add a domain = needs more domains. Keep this up endlessly and ICANN makes a shitload of money while nobody can figure out what the hell the website they're supposed to type in is without googling it first.

Re:Well then... (3, Funny)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 2 years ago | (#40170171)

This is why allowing .xxx was a slippery slope. Now we crossed the line so real evil can get top level domains .bank and .insurance indeed.

Re:Well then... (1)

Mitreya (579078) | more than 2 years ago | (#40170449)

This is why allowing .xxx was a slippery slope. Now we crossed the line so real evil can get top level domains .bank and .insurance indeed.

No one types in domain address anymore, so it doesn't really matter.
Moreover, if someone does type in address www.someplace.bank, they will often type it into google's search box and not into the browser navigation toolbar...

Re:Well then... (1)

jekewa (751500) | more than 2 years ago | (#40172371)

No one types in domain address anymore, so it doesn't really matter.

True enough, and this can actually weaken security as your browser then checks for the existence of .com and .net and .org and .everyOtherTLDuntilItFindsYours, one (or more) of which will have been acquired by phishermen. Using a different TLD might seem like a great way to aggregate things, but my bank doesn't use .mobi to deliver mobile content to my phone, instead choosing to use m.bankname.com (not my real bank...heh...). Maybe it'll be intuitive after a while, but at least for the purposes of browsing for "bankname" alone in the address bar, it's a bad deal.

Moreover, if someone does type in address www.someplace.bank, they will often type it into google's search box and not into the browser navigation toolbar...

At least some of us do this on purpose, not because we're confused by the purpose of the big box, but because we're looking for search results about the perhaps heretofore unrecognized domain that might warn us about dubious uses.

Re:Well then... (1)

multicoregeneral (2618207) | more than 2 years ago | (#40173419)

That is true. The real purpose of an alternative tld is for cool business cards. Like when I reserved my name .asia for the fuck of it. Biggest problem I'm having is that people who get my .asia business card are still typing in my .com email address. Even if they don't have my .com email address. That's a huge problem. Of course, the day will come when nobody uses email addresses either. And on that day, I will throw a wild party, and only people who have had to live with the unending horror that is email administration will be invited.

Re:Well then... (1)

multicoregeneral (2618207) | more than 2 years ago | (#40173439)

Damn, I really did a mojojo with that last sentence.

Re:Well then... (1)

multicoregeneral (2618207) | more than 2 years ago | (#40173357)

I hadn't thought to look at it that way, but now that you mention it... if they ever release .satan or .evil as a TLD, I'll be the first to sign up. No, seriously, I'll write a program that'll use timers accurate to the billionth of a second, so I can be the first in the door.

nice editing (2)

Cyko_01 (1092499) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169329)

to operate to top level Internet domains, .bank and .insurance, on behalf of

I think you mean two - as is 1,2,3

Re:nice editing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40169623)

slashdot has utterly gone tits up. the constant lack of spell checking is abysmal at best.

slight flaw (2)

slashmydots (2189826) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169363)

Considering the #1 most repeated rule for general PC users is "if it doesn't contain just your bank's website and end in .com, it's fake," I'm not sure they're doing themselves any favors. A year from now if I can an e-mail from MyBanksName.bank, even I'd assume it's a fake and not click it.

Re:slight flaw (2)

htnmmo (1454573) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169547)

Considering the #1 most repeated rule for general PC users is "if it doesn't contain just your bank's website and end in .com, it's fake," I'm not sure they're doing themselves any favors. A year from now if I can an e-mail from MyBanksName.bank, even I'd assume it's a fake and not click it.

The flaw is that anyone can get a .com domain name so I could go and by a domain name like Citi-Bank-Secure-For-Realz.com and some people would fall for it. I mean it does say it's for realz!

If the .bank and .insurance TLDs were restricted by an industry group that assured only legitimate banks and insurers could purchase domains in that space, I can see how it would increase trust as long as consumers are made aware of the new changes. If it does happen there would be a big push to raise awareness through direct contact with their customers and the media.

I think this makes a lot of sense.

Re:slight flaw (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40169669)

I'm imagining an internet where trade groups disallow trade-group TLDs to any business that doesn't pay them dues. Not subscribed to the RIAA? No .singer, .artist, .music, .whatever for you. Not in the BSA? No .software...

Re:slight flaw (2)

htnmmo (1454573) | more than 2 years ago | (#40170023)

I'm imagining an internet where trade groups disallow trade-group TLDs to any business that doesn't pay them dues. Not subscribed to the RIAA? No .singer, .artist, .music, .whatever for you. Not in the BSA? No .software...

Yes throw in two industry groups that everyone on here hates to make this sound like a bad idea.

The interenet already has restricted TLDs so this concept isn't new. When you visit a .gov site you know you're dealing with a government website. Starting in 2001 .edu domains also were restricted to accredited schools.

Who controls access to these TLDs is important but it makes sense to have it be some sort of industry group that can fairly manage it. .singer, .artist, .music, .software aren't being discussed and the reason for .bank and .insurance are very different. Millions, maybe billions of dollars are lost annually to phishing schemes in this sector and having restricted TLDs can help reduce that number.

Re:slight flaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40170779)

very very doubtful.

It doesn't change anything about phishing and scams that stupid people already fall for. If they cant tell the difference between urls already simply shifting banking it to another tld isn't going to make a damn bit of difference.

But it will enable the industry groups to enact a tax on smaller banks, credit unions and insurers if they want to look "legit".

Re:slight flaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40174687)

Oh noes!! So you're saying the numerous local musicians in my area will be restricted to owning an internet domain with a traditional TLD?! What a tragedy! I might as well stop going to local pubs right away and go buy the new Rhiana CD... In other words, this is how much I'd give a shit if your scenario comes true:

Re:slight flaw (4, Insightful)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169899)

If the .bank and .insurance TLDs were restricted by a national industry group

the rest of the world is fucked.

FTFY.

Re:slight flaw (1)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169999)

No, the rest of the world where English is the official language is fucked. We (the others) don't care.

Re:slight flaw (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#40170435)

Also, Sweden, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and Hungary.

Re:slight flaw (1)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 2 years ago | (#40170343)

Are you going to explain that to my Grandma? or is the email that has the link to a .bank site going to?

Re:slight flaw (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169559)

I'll be interested to see if this arbitrary TLD nonsense merely expands the TLD-ghetto that exists beyond the top few into a nearly infinite morass, or whether the sheer confusion throws us back to a google-based equivalent of the old days of 'AOL Keywords', where virtually everybody has abandoned any hope of knowing the URL, and just plugs in some stuff in the search bar and hits enter...

Re:slight flaw (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40170095)

That happened a long time ago. Anyone who knows what a URL is and uses their URL bar instead of a search engine is already a special case. That's part of why the whole TLD thing is silly.

in other news... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40169469)

Supreme court has ruled that people are no longer people and only corporations are people.
The gov has applied for .surf and this will become the only tld available to non-persons.

I think I left my tinfoil hat in your yard...

Re:in other news... (1)

busyqth (2566075) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169485)

The gov has applied for .surf and this will become the only tld available to non-persons.

Catch a wave, dude.

Bank in America (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40169475)

I see.

Like no other country in the world has a bank or insurance company.

I guess that we just naturally must trust the Americans to regulate which companies in Canada, or the UK, or Mexico, or Saudi Arabia or Australia or Switzerland can call themselves a ".bank" or a ".insurance" company.

Better solution: Give the control of ".bank" and ".insurance" to the IMF.

Re:Bank in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40169589)

I see.

Like no other country in the world has a bank or insurance company.

Other countries use different languages, so they could have different domains.
For example, British banks could use .british-bank.

Re:Bank in America (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169953)

Don't you mean:

The-United-Kingdom-of-Great-Britain-and-Northern-Ireland.bank

Re:Bank in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40170549)

No, I was talking about British banks.
Irish banks could use .irish-bank

Re:Bank in America (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#40170583)

Yeah, that's the actual name of the country. Northern Ireland & Scotland are actually part of the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom [wikipedia.org]

Now you see how ridiculous it could become.

Re:Bank in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40172483)

You may have been talking about countries but I was talking about islands.

Re:Bank in America (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#40172549)

1. Go check what you wrote.
2. That makes no freaking sense. How many populated islands are there in the world?

Re:Bank in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40172825)

It's just like "British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC)".
No one says "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Broadcasting Corporation (UKoGBaNIBC)".
That's because the BBC broadcasts from the island of Britain. Ireland is a completely different island that is a different country except for the little British colony at the top.

Re:Bank in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40170681)

Both of your comments are deeply retarded. Well done!

Re:Bank in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40172573)

Yep, that's me: Willing to go the extra mile just to be of service to people like you.

Re:Bank in America (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169601)

Now, I wouldn't put an American banker or insurance company in charge of somebody else's counterfeit nickel; but surely the IMF isn't much better...

Re:Bank in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40169699)

Because the IMF is so trustworthy?

Re:Bank in America (1)

I_am_Jack (1116205) | more than 2 years ago | (#40172729)

Better solution: Give the control of ".bank" and ".insurance" to the IMF.

And then let the ABA and Financial Services Roundtable operate .theft, .fraud and .noretirement.

Re:Bank in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40176129)

I'd much rather see Canadian banks use a .ca domain, British banks .uk, etc. Maybe even .bank.ca, .bank.uk. I just don't trust people who are in charge of "international" TLDs, whether they're Americans or not. Canadian banks are regulated solely by Canadian laws, and their internet presence should also be regulated solely by Canadian laws... Besides, most Canadian people and organisations are already moving their domains away from .com and .org to the .ca TLD, which is a good thing imo.

Re:Bank in America (1)

jsfs (1329511) | more than 2 years ago | (#40176423)

But that would make sense, so obviously we can't do that.

Not good at all for non-US institutions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40169645)

In some countries, banks and insurance companies must fulfil certain requirements to be allowed to use the work "RE" or "BANK" in their corporate names. I severely doubt that the ABA meets the required standards and so these corporations will be masquerading as Banks or other financial institutions.

Unless the .bank or .insurance TLDs end up blocked outside the US I foresee another round of lawsuits.

URLs should be arbitrary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40169651)

TLDs are archaic and should be abolished. They serve no purpose anymore.

Customers... (1)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169711)

to 'provide the highest security for the millions of customers conducting banking and insurance activities online.'

And by "customers" they mean the banks and insurance companies.

While that may not be a "bad thing", I'm sure there will be instances when the best interest of the banks/insurers are in direct conflict with their customers - you know "us", the internet users - and I'm dubious as to how impartial the American Bankers Association and the Financial Services Roundtable will be.

Highest security (1)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169723)

Yes, because everyone knows a vanity TLD is much more secure than a measly .com - what a lame-ass excuse to apply for a vanity domain. Typical Baronism.

This is great! (1)

Cornwallis (1188489) | more than 2 years ago | (#40169781)

Finally all the banksters will be corralled in one location for easy identification.

Why can't they... (2)

Belial6 (794905) | more than 2 years ago | (#40170007)

Why can't they just register (buy from who ever already owns) "bank.com" and run a DNS from that? They could just as easily sell bofa.bank.com, capitalone.bank.com, etc, etc.... as they could bofa.bank, capitalone.bank.

Re:Why can't they... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40172413)

Registrant:
  First PlaceA? Internet, Inc.
  P. O. Box 3727
  Clearwater, Florida 33767
  US

  Domain name: BANK.COM

  Administrative Contact:
        Administrator, Internet
        P. O. Box 3727
        Clearwater, Florida 33767
        US
        +1.727.447.9594
  Technical Contact:
        Administrator, Internet
        P. O. Box 3727
        Clearwater, Florida 33767
        US
        +1.727.447.9594

  Registrar of Record: TUCOWS, INC.
  Record last updated on 01-Mar-2012.
  Record expires on 11-Dec-2019.
  Record created on 12-Dec-1998.

Re:Why can't they... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40172539)

In light of the comments above I'd prefer them to use "bank.us".

I always hoped russia would get .nyet (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40171807)

I always hoped russia would get .nyet

And maybe .comm

Get it right IRL, first. (1)

John Bokma (834313) | more than 2 years ago | (#40175467)

Last November my bank card was stolen. It was reported within an hour to the bank, Banamex in this case (I live in Mexico). Yet the thieves had managed to clone the card and shop in two different locations within that time frame, buying for over 2000 USD in goods.

No problem you would think. Think, right. Banamex is insured. So when we found out we went to the nearest branch of Banamex. We were told there are 2 ways to report it: by phone, normally resolved within 15 days; or by filling in a form, normally resolved within 3 months. Of course we picked the phone solution. After 4 hours of trying to report this by phone -- I don't speak Spanish well, but that's no excuse for piss poor service, countless random hangups, long, long waits -- we decided to go to the next day to the branch where I had opened my account.

The next day... after 2 more hours of more of the same, we decided to go with the form

After a period of 3 months had passed, we checked with a branch: still in process. Waited another month: still in process. Another month: Oops, we lost your form. No problem sir, when was the last time you contacted before this time? In April? Ok, we re-start the process and use that one as the starting point, so call us back in... eh... 2.5 months, sir.

Really? Online security? First fix the piss poor excuse of bank cards that are in circulation, especially the ones handed out by Banamex, Mexico.

Schools getting XXX domains (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40177885)

Now it may be a rumour, but I've heard that some schools are registering their school names as XXX domains - get this - to prevent the porn purveyors from jumping the gun and getting the school's name first. So to get to MyTopClassHighSchool you could legitimately go to MyTopClassHighSchool.xxx. Is that the way to sell education, as the path to high quality sex?

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?