Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Popular
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

NodeBB-ActivityPub Bridge Test Instance

  1. Home
  2. Categories
  3. Fediverse memes
  4. Voyager changed to lemmy.zip as well

Voyager changed to lemmy.zip as well

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Fediverse memes
fedimemes
26 Posts 15 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
    blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
    blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    wrote last edited by
    #1

    Welcome post: https://lemmy.zip/post/40323214

    Voyager change: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45890744

    Link Preview Image
    J solsangraal@lemmy.zipS M N T 6 Replies Last reply
    135
    • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

      Welcome post: https://lemmy.zip/post/40323214

      Voyager change: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45890744

      Link Preview Image
      J This user is from outside of this forum
      J This user is from outside of this forum
      joyjoy@lemmy.zip
      wrote last edited by
      #2

      lemm.ee refugee here. I was considering piefed, but photon didn't support it.

      blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB S 2 Replies Last reply
      6
      • J joyjoy@lemmy.zip

        lemm.ee refugee here. I was considering piefed, but photon didn't support it.

        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        wrote last edited by
        #3

        Now that the API is there, hopefully it will in the future

        1 Reply Last reply
        9
        • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

          Welcome post: https://lemmy.zip/post/40323214

          Voyager change: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45890744

          Link Preview Image
          solsangraal@lemmy.zipS This user is from outside of this forum
          solsangraal@lemmy.zipS This user is from outside of this forum
          solsangraal@lemmy.zip
          wrote last edited by
          #4

          been on .zip 2 years-- its been great, and @Demigodrick@lemmy.zip is incredible as admin

          demigodrick@lemmy.zipD H 2 Replies Last reply
          24
          • solsangraal@lemmy.zipS solsangraal@lemmy.zip

            been on .zip 2 years-- its been great, and @Demigodrick@lemmy.zip is incredible as admin

            demigodrick@lemmy.zipD This user is from outside of this forum
            demigodrick@lemmy.zipD This user is from outside of this forum
            demigodrick@lemmy.zip
            wrote last edited by
            #5

            That's very kind of you ❤️

            1 Reply Last reply
            19
            • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

              Welcome post: https://lemmy.zip/post/40323214

              Voyager change: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45890744

              Link Preview Image
              M This user is from outside of this forum
              M This user is from outside of this forum
              muzzle@lemm.ee
              wrote last edited by
              #6

              Can you recommend an instance with a federation policy as wide as lemm.ee? Lemmy.zip, for instance, does not federate with hexbear, right?

              blackn1ght@feddit.ukB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB T lumun@lemmy.zipL 4 Replies Last reply
              6
              • M muzzle@lemm.ee

                Can you recommend an instance with a federation policy as wide as lemm.ee? Lemmy.zip, for instance, does not federate with hexbear, right?

                blackn1ght@feddit.ukB This user is from outside of this forum
                blackn1ght@feddit.ukB This user is from outside of this forum
                blackn1ght@feddit.uk
                wrote last edited by
                #7

                Feddit.uk is pretty good for this. I think our defed list is pretty minimal.

                1 Reply Last reply
                3
                • M muzzle@lemm.ee

                  Can you recommend an instance with a federation policy as wide as lemm.ee? Lemmy.zip, for instance, does not federate with hexbear, right?

                  blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                  blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                  blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  wrote last edited by
                  #8

                  Both list of blocked instances are in the body of this post

                  Lemm.ee federates HB, and lemmy.zip does too.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  8
                  • J joyjoy@lemmy.zip

                    lemm.ee refugee here. I was considering piefed, but photon didn't support it.

                    S This user is from outside of this forum
                    S This user is from outside of this forum
                    sc00ter@lemm.ee
                    wrote last edited by
                    #9

                    Im currently usong boost with .ee, but i think support for that stopped too? Im going to have to change clients and instances

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

                      Welcome post: https://lemmy.zip/post/40323214

                      Voyager change: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45890744

                      Link Preview Image
                      N This user is from outside of this forum
                      N This user is from outside of this forum
                      naiboftabr@infosec.pub
                      wrote last edited by
                      #10

                      I still can't take anyone running a .zip TLD seriously. It was bad idea to create it and it's a bad idea to use it.

                      blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB J 2 Replies Last reply
                      12
                      • N naiboftabr@infosec.pub

                        I still can't take anyone running a .zip TLD seriously. It was bad idea to create it and it's a bad idea to use it.

                        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                        wrote last edited by blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                        #11

                        Is there any PoC of attacks on Lemmy using .zip TLD ? The instance has been up for 2 years, I never heard anything

                        N 1 Reply Last reply
                        2
                        • N naiboftabr@infosec.pub

                          I still can't take anyone running a .zip TLD seriously. It was bad idea to create it and it's a bad idea to use it.

                          J This user is from outside of this forum
                          J This user is from outside of this forum
                          jax@sh.itjust.works
                          wrote last edited by
                          #12

                          Can you explain why, for me? Genuinely curious, I don't understand.

                          N 1 Reply Last reply
                          2
                          • J jax@sh.itjust.works

                            Can you explain why, for me? Genuinely curious, I don't understand.

                            N This user is from outside of this forum
                            N This user is from outside of this forum
                            naiboftabr@infosec.pub
                            wrote last edited by naiboftabr@infosec.pub
                            #13

                            The problem is that .zip conflicts with the very commonly used zip archive format which has caused user confusion - a user might click on what appears to be a URL to www.fakewebsite.zip and instead end up downloading a malicious .zip file. This creates an unnecessary and entirely avoidable security risk.

                            Google opened registration for the .zip and .mov top-level domains to the general public on May 3, 2023. Its release was immediately met with condemnation from cyber security experts as a result of its similarity with the file format of the same name. Malwarebytes warned against the use of already recognizable filenames and their confusion with top-level domains, as "plenty of users already have a clear idea that .zip means something completely different". Experts cautioned against their use, and noted that the use of .zip filetypes in cybercrime had had "an explosion" in recent years. Cisco warned against the potential for leaks for personal identifying information. Researchers also registered similar concern about Google's .mov domain.

                            Surveys by security researchers immediately following public release of domain registration found numerous examples of links and domains registered under .zip being used in phishing attempts, and the ICSS recommended disabling access to .zip domains until "the dust settles and risks can be assessed".

                            Link Preview Image
                            .zip (top-level domain) - Wikipedia

                            favicon

                            (en.wikipedia.org)

                            Choosing to use this TLD basically just screams ignorance, and should be causing users to question the competence of the person who made that choice.

                            blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB 1 Reply Last reply
                            12
                            • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

                              Is there any PoC of attacks on Lemmy using .zip TLD ? The instance has been up for 2 years, I never heard anything

                              N This user is from outside of this forum
                              N This user is from outside of this forum
                              naiboftabr@infosec.pub
                              wrote last edited by
                              #14

                              Targeting Lemmy specifically? probably not, but that's not really the issue. It's not that being a .zip address makes the server vulnerable, it's that the existence of the .zip TLD makes everyone vulnerable:

                              Surveys by security researchers immediately following public release of domain registration found numerous examples of links and domains registered under .zip being used in phishing attempts, and the ICSS recommended disabling access to .zip domains until "the dust settles and risks can be assessed".

                              Link Preview Image
                              .zip (top-level domain) - Wikipedia

                              favicon

                              (en.wikipedia.org)

                              blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB 1 Reply Last reply
                              9
                              • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

                                Welcome post: https://lemmy.zip/post/40323214

                                Voyager change: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45890744

                                Link Preview Image
                                T This user is from outside of this forum
                                T This user is from outside of this forum
                                tweak@feddit.uk
                                wrote last edited by
                                #15

                                lemmy.zip doesn't allow users from the UK.

                                blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB 1 Reply Last reply
                                5
                                • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

                                  Welcome post: https://lemmy.zip/post/40323214

                                  Voyager change: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/45890744

                                  Link Preview Image
                                  rickyrigatoni@retrolemmy.comR This user is from outside of this forum
                                  rickyrigatoni@retrolemmy.comR This user is from outside of this forum
                                  rickyrigatoni@retrolemmy.com
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #16

                                  You guys are making me feel left out 😞

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • N naiboftabr@infosec.pub

                                    The problem is that .zip conflicts with the very commonly used zip archive format which has caused user confusion - a user might click on what appears to be a URL to www.fakewebsite.zip and instead end up downloading a malicious .zip file. This creates an unnecessary and entirely avoidable security risk.

                                    Google opened registration for the .zip and .mov top-level domains to the general public on May 3, 2023. Its release was immediately met with condemnation from cyber security experts as a result of its similarity with the file format of the same name. Malwarebytes warned against the use of already recognizable filenames and their confusion with top-level domains, as "plenty of users already have a clear idea that .zip means something completely different". Experts cautioned against their use, and noted that the use of .zip filetypes in cybercrime had had "an explosion" in recent years. Cisco warned against the potential for leaks for personal identifying information. Researchers also registered similar concern about Google's .mov domain.

                                    Surveys by security researchers immediately following public release of domain registration found numerous examples of links and domains registered under .zip being used in phishing attempts, and the ICSS recommended disabling access to .zip domains until "the dust settles and risks can be assessed".

                                    Link Preview Image
                                    .zip (top-level domain) - Wikipedia

                                    favicon

                                    (en.wikipedia.org)

                                    Choosing to use this TLD basically just screams ignorance, and should be causing users to question the competence of the person who made that choice.

                                    blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                                    blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                                    blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #17

                                    Our findings show that the abuse rate for the .zip TLD is 0.20% which is close to the average compared to all other TLDs. This rate indicates that .zip domain names are not being used to attack users more than the average TLDs - at least for now. However, if attackers find they have better success using .zip than other TLDs, the rates of abuse might change.

                                    Given new TLDs, such as .zip, tend to have a higher abuse rate than legacy and ccTLDs we suggest that the security research community should continue the healthy debate about the potential risks of the .zip TLD and that internet users continue to be weary of downloading and opening files with a .zip extension or TLD from sources or individuals they may not know.

                                    Link Preview Image
                                    The .zip TLD: Ripe for abuse, but so far so good

                                    favicon

                                    DNS Research Federation (dnsrf.org)

                                    Choosing to use this TLD basically just screams ignorance, and should be causing users to question the competence of the person who made that choice.

                                    Not sure if that tone is the best for a healthy debate.

                                    N 1 Reply Last reply
                                    5
                                    • N naiboftabr@infosec.pub

                                      Targeting Lemmy specifically? probably not, but that's not really the issue. It's not that being a .zip address makes the server vulnerable, it's that the existence of the .zip TLD makes everyone vulnerable:

                                      Surveys by security researchers immediately following public release of domain registration found numerous examples of links and domains registered under .zip being used in phishing attempts, and the ICSS recommended disabling access to .zip domains until "the dust settles and risks can be assessed".

                                      Link Preview Image
                                      .zip (top-level domain) - Wikipedia

                                      favicon

                                      (en.wikipedia.org)

                                      blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                                      blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                                      blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #18

                                      Our findings show that the abuse rate for the .zip TLD is 0.20% which is close to the average compared to all other TLDs. This rate indicates that .zip domain names are not being used to attack users more than the average TLDs - at least for now. However, if attackers find they have better success using .zip than other TLDs, the rates of abuse might change.

                                      Given new TLDs, such as .zip, tend to have a higher abuse rate than legacy and ccTLDs we suggest that the security research community should continue the healthy debate about the potential risks of the .zip TLD and that internet users continue to be weary of downloading and opening files with a .zip extension or TLD from sources or individuals they may not know.

                                      Link Preview Image
                                      The .zip TLD: Ripe for abuse, but so far so good

                                      favicon

                                      DNS Research Federation (dnsrf.org)

                                      Choosing to use this TLD basically just screams ignorance, and should be causing users to question the competence of the person who made that choice.

                                      Not sure if that tone is the best for a healthy debate.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • T tweak@feddit.uk

                                        lemmy.zip doesn't allow users from the UK.

                                        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                                        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB This user is from outside of this forum
                                        blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #19

                                        Those users are probably going to go to feddit.uk?

                                        T 1 Reply Last reply
                                        1
                                        • blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.comB blaze@lemmy.dbzer0.com

                                          Our findings show that the abuse rate for the .zip TLD is 0.20% which is close to the average compared to all other TLDs. This rate indicates that .zip domain names are not being used to attack users more than the average TLDs - at least for now. However, if attackers find they have better success using .zip than other TLDs, the rates of abuse might change.

                                          Given new TLDs, such as .zip, tend to have a higher abuse rate than legacy and ccTLDs we suggest that the security research community should continue the healthy debate about the potential risks of the .zip TLD and that internet users continue to be weary of downloading and opening files with a .zip extension or TLD from sources or individuals they may not know.

                                          Link Preview Image
                                          The .zip TLD: Ripe for abuse, but so far so good

                                          favicon

                                          DNS Research Federation (dnsrf.org)

                                          Choosing to use this TLD basically just screams ignorance, and should be causing users to question the competence of the person who made that choice.

                                          Not sure if that tone is the best for a healthy debate.

                                          N This user is from outside of this forum
                                          N This user is from outside of this forum
                                          naiboftabr@infosec.pub
                                          wrote last edited by naiboftabr@infosec.pub
                                          #20

                                          Right, ok, so the problem with having a debate on this subject is that there's no reason for this risk to exist at all. There's no good reason to have a .zip TLD, there was no need for it, it should not have been created and no one should use it.

                                          If you're weighing pros and cons, there are exactly 0 pros. Therefore no matter how minor you think the cons are, they outweigh 0 pros by 100%.

                                          Also, "nothing bad has happened yet" is not a valid argument and is a terrible basis for making risk decisions.

                                          J blaze@piefed.socialB 2 Replies Last reply
                                          3
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          Powered by NodeBB Contributors
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Popular