Somene please explain this logic to me...

[alphamale]

here is Firefox's TLD whitelist: http://www.mozilla.org/projects/secu...licy-list.html

we know .com and .net show punycode, and this is why as they are not on the whitelist. But... why on earth not, what possible rationale is there, does anyone have a clue why not?

[Rubber Duck]

Because Verisign follows ICANN policy, not Mozilla's. Mozilla cannot get their heads around the fact that they are not responsible for Internet Governance. If evidence was needed that the Software Manufacturers are playing politics, this is it!

[alphamale]

if you look at some of the so called "policy documents" hyperlinked from the whitelist, some are no more than a "what is an IDN?" type FAQ.

there is no reason for .com and .net not to be on there - i can find a 100 similar "policy" documents. this is BS

[Rubber Duck]

Yes Bull Shit to spell it out in full. Mozilla know that the only extension that is going to result in significant Phishing attacks in the US, whic appears to be the only place that matters, is dot com. The others are just Window dressing. Because they haven't done the development work that Microsoft has to introduce a plausible system this is a convenient fudge. It is, however, evil because it promotes the myth that phishing is essentially caused by IDN. FHs.