Porn '.xxx' address rejected

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2007-04-01 11:57am

CNN wrote:Porn '.xxx' address rejected

POSTED: 9:51 a.m. EDT, March 30, 2007

• Internet guideline agency ICANN rejects ".xxx" domain plan
• Adult industry and religious groups opposed move
• ICANN worried it could lead to deal with content regulation

LISBON, Portugal (AP) -- The agency that sets the Internet addressing guidelines influencing how people navigate the Web defeated a proposal Friday to give adult Web sites their own ".xxx" domain.

Many in the adult-entertainment industry and religious groups alike had criticized the plan, which the Canadian government also warned this week could leave the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers in the tricky business of content regulation.

The 9-5 decision by ICANN's board came nearly seven years after the proposal was first floated by ICM Registry LLC. It was the third time ICANN has rejected such a bid. One member abstained from voting.

Many of the board members said they were concerned about the possibility that ICANN could find itself in the content regulation business if the domain name was approved. Others criticized that, saying ICANN should not block new domains over fears like that, noting that local, state and national laws could be used to decide what is pornographic and what is not.

It was not immediately clear if ICM would revise its proposal again, abandon the bid or perhaps appeal the decision or take action through the courts.

Cos Dashit · Post by **Cos Dashit** » 2007-04-01 10:15pm

Good, It woud be too much of a headache anyway. What would be the deciding factor? I'm sure some would consider some videos on Youtube borderline pornographic, even her in AMP we've had nudie drawings; would we be .xxx?

Teleros · Post by **Teleros** » 2007-04-02 07:29am

It might've been a headache to implement but it would have made things much easier when it comes to firewalls (I mean at work you shouldn't in the first place, and at home you can turn it off when the kids are asleep

).

Darth Holbytlan · Post by **Darth Holbytlan** » 2007-04-02 02:22pm

Teleros wrote:It might've been a headache to implement but it would have made things much easier when it comes to firewalls (I mean at work you shouldn't in the first place, and at home you can turn it off when the kids are asleep ).

Not really. This doesn't help a firewall tell if an IP is associated with a porn site. You can block DNS and web-proxy filters from returning .xxx domains, but that wouldn't stop anyone from accessing porn sites using plain IP addresses. Nor does it stop anyone from using a site's regular non-.xxx domain unless someone manages to effectively ban non-.xxx porn sites (not likely).

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2007-04-02 07:59pm

Darth Holbytlan wrote:
Teleros wrote:It might've been a headache to implement but it would have made things much easier when it comes to firewalls (I mean at work you shouldn't in the first place, and at home you can turn it off when the kids are asleep ).
Not really. This doesn't help a firewall tell if an IP is associated with a porn site. You can block DNS and web-proxy filters from returning .xxx domains, but that wouldn't stop anyone from accessing porn sites using plain IP addresses. Nor does it stop anyone from using a site's regular non-.xxx domain unless someone manages to effectively ban non-.xxx porn sites (not likely).

You could do a reverse DNS lookup and reject any sites which have .xxx domains. It's slower than ordinary DNS, but it's possible. For example, if I type my IP address into one of those reverse DNS lookup web sites, it returns heterodyne.student.iastate.edu which actually is my host name.

This scheme would of course be terribly easy to circumvent; does anyone really think that all the pornographic material will migrate to .xxx? But the point is that it would be perfectly doable to block all IP addresses with .xxx domain names.

Darth Holbytlan · Post by **Darth Holbytlan** » 2007-04-03 05:04pm

sketerpot wrote:You could do a reverse DNS lookup and reject any sites which have .xxx domains. It's slower than ordinary DNS, but it's possible. For example, if I type my IP address into one of those reverse DNS lookup web sites, it returns heterodyne.student.iastate.edu which actually is my host name.

Actually, no. The "reverse DNS lookup" just reports whatever the owner of the IP has set it to be. There's nothing that would force someone using a .xxx domain to report it when reversed, so unless they set it up like that on purpose, the filtering won't work. And there are already better voluntary rating mechanisms (such as PICS) to filter on, anyway.

Many reverse DNS lookups just return nothing or a generic IP.something.myisp.com nowadays. Both of these are completely useless for filtering.