Re: upstream and downstream

Adam M. Costello wrote:
> Please think twice before creating a precedent of a browser completely
> blackholing a technically valid (albeit devious) site. 

If the site is devious, what possible benefit is there in allowing the 
user access to it?

If someone came up with a valid use for this character in IDNs, that 
would be different.

>>My initial list includes the homographs of ":", ".", "/" and probably 
>>"\" too, plus all the space characters.
> 
> I imagine you'd want all the characters that could immediately follow
> the host name in a URI, so add "?" and "#" to that list.

Yes. It is looking a bit like "all punctuation", isn't it? But then, I 
bet there are some characters which look like punctuation. The Chinese 
character for the number 1 looks fairly like a hyphen.

>>P.S. Of course, the slash homograph attack wouldn't fool the Firefox
>>SSL domain security indicator anyway, which would still display the
>>entire domain, fake slashes and all.
> 
> Yes, but do users understand what that indicator means?  If they see
> foo.com/bar.baz.xx in the indicator, do they understand that it is
> unrelated to foo.com?

Well, it would certainly be different to all the other times they'd 
visited mybank.com, so hopefully that would give them some pause.

Gerv