Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by phkahler on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @12:40PM (#38100899)

>> IMHO all those new TLDs are just a huge mistake and a blatant money-grab.

Especially with this one. There is no room for competition since each verb can only be used once with the ing suffix. Well, competition for who is willing to pay the most, but from the consumer side there can only be one URL.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by toast0 on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @02:59PM (#38103204)

i mean, if you can't get fuck.ing/cool, you can go with reallyfuck.ing/cool or getsurf.ing gosurf.ing learnsurf.ing or justhang.ing/out etc

I think I'm at my limit of dumb domain names for no reason though, so I'll pass on this round.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by supermatt on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:20PM (#38104471)

Reallyfuckingcool.net or .org available, same for getsurfing, learnsurfing and justhangingout. With all these domains there’s no real point unless you are getting a dictionary word or a specific name, imho.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by FireInsight on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:28PM (#38104620)

reallyfuckingcool.ing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by zymhan on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @06:28PM (#38106241)

Great for an HVAC company

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by pdntspa on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @06:04PM (#38105966)

Which just outlines how it is a money-grab for existing property owners. Yet another stupid vanity domain you're forced to add to your portfolio!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by marcus_holmes on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @08:59PM (#38107579)

I wonder if we're at the point that the costs of registering a new TLD are immediately recouped from the set of large businesses that must register their name in every TLD?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by Ayesh on Thursday November 02, 2023 @12:36AM (#38109041)

I was thinking about this too. Some TLDs look like an obvious obligatory money grab (such as .download), so companies are compelled to buy it.

I have seen some TLDs owned by a company and didn't even bother to set a redirect.

My anecdote is that the ICANN annual fee ($25k) is easily covered by these obligatory registrations and the premium domains. The cost of running nameservers aren't that high. NS1 has an offering, but it's impossible to find their pricing for anything.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by SXX on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @12:33PM (#38100758)

Sadly phish.ing is over $1000 / year.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by have_faith on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:10PM (#38103367)

But think of the return

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by jowea on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:31PM (#38103634)

Think of how funny it will be when you send out a social engineering training test email with that URL to your company and see who falls for it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by codetrotter on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:45PM (#38103847)

  https://we.are.totally.not.phish.ing/this-is-legit/link.php?really=just-click-it&fill-in=your-pii&submit=true

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by dottjt on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @05:26PM (#38105558)

Wouldn't it be called fish.ing instead, so you'd trick users.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by koolba on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @07:56PM (#38107101)

The real money is in spearfish.ing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by ahmedfromtunis on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @12:19PM (#38100501)

They already got the bank.ing domain name.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by agilob on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @12:23PM (#38100576)

but do they have fuckof\f.ing for submitting complaints?

Edit: HN doesn't accept FO as one word, it replaces the last `f` with `i`. Try it yourself.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by cbsks on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @12:47PM (#38101015)

Seems to work for me: Fuckoff fuckoff.ing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by jackbravo on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:38PM (#38104808)

I only see *** ***.ing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by rad_gruchalski on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @09:21PM (#38107750)

You might be mitm-ed. there’s no space in the original.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by Cyphase on Thursday November 02, 2023 @01:23AM (#38109310)

It must be Anton's son.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by mindcrime on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @02:52PM (#38103100)

Is this just a trick to see how many people you can get to type 'fuckoff'? :-)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by agilob on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:25PM (#38104570)

Let me test it again...

Edit: No I swear, when I typed fuckingoff.ing and post the comment it shows as fuckingofi.ing to me. I edited the post a dozen of times and it always displayed something else. I tested it even on two browsers!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by gpderetta on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:14PM (#38103417)

  hunter2

I don't understand, it seems to work for me.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by MongoTheMad on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:56PM (#38104015)

I am old. I forgot about this hunter2 password filter phish reference.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by corobo on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @06:55PM (#38106536)

hunter2 is 20 years old next year, just to make everyone else feel old too

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by qup on Thursday November 02, 2023 @02:41AM (#38109763)

Huh. i actually thought it was older. I can remember a time before *******

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by KeplerBoy on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @06:20PM (#38106170)

And they use it to remind people that the .ing tld is a bad idea.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by moehm on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @08:37PM (#38107399)

With this gem on their side:

> While bank.ing is managed by ING, please be aware that any other domain ending with .ing is not an ING website.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by valianteffort on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @12:34PM (#38100781)

Thank obama for that one

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by expertentipp on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @12:57PM (#38101170)

Mobile app is already first class citizen at ING in some EU countries. One is unable to make transactions or even is locked out completely from all online channels after losing access to their mobile app, or if their app simply stops responding on tapping the "Confirm" button. Web is merely second class citizen. No idea how they arrived to this retarded architectue. Submitting any kind of architectural feedback to a bank is hopeless and helpless, these fuckers always know better.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by taway1237 on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:51PM (#38103948)

> No idea how they arrived to this retarded architecture

2FA is known to increase security drastically. It's easy to understand why it's a good idea.

EU banks in particular do this because 2FA for banks is mandated by a EU level directive.

> Submitting any kind of architectural feedback to a bank is hopeless and helpless, these fuckers always know better.

In this case they clearly do.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by aidenn0 on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:59PM (#38104094)

There are lots of options for 2FA that don't require me to install a bloated and buggy app that only supports one bank.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by Tijdreiziger on Thursday November 02, 2023 @06:16AM (#38111334)

You don't have to install it, you can ask them to send you a physical 2FA device instead.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by expertentipp on Friday November 03, 2023 @06:51AM (#38126835)

They charge money for physical 2FA device.

https://www.ing.de/hilfe/auftraege-freigeben/phototan/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by expertentipp on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:26PM (#38104592)

In at least one EU country the only available free of charge second factor of 2FA at ING is their FULL MOBILE BANKING APP. You're posting a comment at HN explaining that "mobile banking app is 2FA because security because EU", are you working there?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by buybackoff on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @05:28PM (#38105572)

Hm, last time I tried 3 years ago paper mails were their only channel (after opening an account online). They were so past century. If they do anything with this TLD before improving their basic banking platform/UX it will only prove the point of how retarded they have been.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by heipei on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:27PM (#38103577)

Ugh, when I saw the HN headline about this TLD I thought it belonged to ING Group, just like .barclays and .chase belong to their corporate owners. Just shows how suited this TLD is for phishing...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by s3p on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @06:36PM (#38106344)

[delayed]

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by rekoil on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @06:51PM (#38106488)

Yes, they do, huge mistake

...but a lot of fun!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by lolsowrong on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @07:11PM (#38106704)

Explain why it’s a huge mistake, please.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by wholinator2 on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @07:23PM (#38106801)

I think the idea is ambiguity between a zip file from your coworkers website and an entirely separate phishing website which downloads an entirely different zip file with a malicious payload.

Anything that introduces unnecessary and previously unforseen ambiguity to the olds is just another path to filling the internet with scams

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by Clamchop on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @07:33PM (#38106907)

Browser vendors should just splash users with one of those click-through security warnings. Make it bright yellow.

I'd be very entertained by drama from owners of those domains, but in my opinion, such a thing would be completely justified.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by afavour on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @08:02PM (#38107141)

Here’s the problem: the biggest browser vendor is the one selling the domains!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by eru on Thursday November 02, 2023 @12:58AM (#38109182)

Well, we also have .com as a common extension on Windows machines?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by snypher on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @09:35PM (#38107857)

A link reading attachment.zip is no longer a 'safe' file but a eg browser window.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by mholt on Thursday November 02, 2023 @01:31AM (#38109359)

Check out familyphotos.zip

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by lucb1e on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @07:25PM (#38106822)

I hate that mentioning example.zip now turns into a link in modern chat programs. At least link preview can be disabled... Also .py is annoying but that one I can understand more why it reasonably needs to exist.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by jeroenhd on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @08:26PM (#38107308)

I don't get it, and I'm sure some people fall for the scams, but .com has been a dangerous file format since before the internet became common and that hasn't been much of a problem either.

My guess is that it'll only be a matter of time before .png and .jpg will be TLDs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by rekoil on Thursday November 02, 2023 @04:23AM (#38110462)

If someone is allowed to make .xlsm a TLD I'm 100% quitting the internet.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by simondotau on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @09:10PM (#38107666)

If I were the lawyers at ING, I would be sending Google it cease-and-desist with regards to selling any domains with banking related terms. I actually think they would have a reasonably strong claim.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by gtirloni on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @09:22PM (#38107766)

And grammar teachers would sue ING?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by eru on Thursday November 02, 2023 @12:57AM (#38109174)

On what grounds? ING can sue on grounds of owning a trademark.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by resolutebat on Thursday November 02, 2023 @12:19AM (#38108946)

https://bank.ing is ING Bank.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by qup on Thursday November 02, 2023 @02:39AM (#38109749)

Suuuuure it is!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by expertentipp on Thursday November 02, 2023 @05:38AM (#38111050)

yeah, right

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by expertentipp on Thursday November 02, 2023 @05:31AM (#38110978)

To be honest both cases are equally strong. Trademark by a bank, and English gerundial suffix. I want to see their lawyers knife fight in a ring while burning piles of cash, it would be an entertaining self resolving problem!

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by ddlsmurf on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:33PM (#38103659)

or maybe they'll buy a whole bunch of insult domains imveryunhappywith.ing dontuse.ing, yourmotherhasapreferenceformassagetoolsfrom.ing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by withinboredom on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:57PM (#38104055)

that's so insult.ing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by Refortified on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @08:09PM (#38107186)

It is, the reasoning along as to buy an .ing domain is laughable at best. it does nothing that a .com isn't already doing

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by kmeisthax on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @08:22PM (#38107272)

I mean, strictly speaking, this argument could apply to any public suffix. Why not have every site be its own TLD in a single global namespace?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by jeroenhd on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @08:34PM (#38107378)

I can't wait for creditcard.ing, pinpas.ing, debitkarte.ing, cartededebit.ing, and all the others to be sent across the world.

Might as well pre-emptively add .ing to every phishing list out there.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Introduc ing the .ing top-level domain by hackeredje on Thursday November 02, 2023 @02:54AM (#38109851)

exactly my fist thought :)

[ Parent | on HN ]