Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Public Suffix List for eventual replacement for current TLD list. #145

Open
miquelfire opened this issue Jan 22, 2015 · 3 comments
Open
Labels

Comments

@miquelfire
Copy link
Member

https://www.publicsuffix.org/

No hurry as other editions will need to find a way to use this (without hurting performance...)

@heavensrevenge
Copy link
Member

Hello Miguel, yea I saw that a long time ago but didn't really think it was necessary since our tld list was already pretty big and no one complained other than one person which I added manually after I saw a comment wanting it lol
So think it would really be a useful thing?

@miquelfire
Copy link
Member Author

This is more a of a long term thing to add.

Ideally, I would like to kinda have a fork of PasswordMaker as a whole (Not sure what to call it, as the online version is 2, some versions are called Pro, but the current algorithm would be the legacy algorithm) and this would be something to include in the changes (like dropping Leet, it only exists because PasswordMaker didn't have character sets, and the passwords it created were of the hex strings)

The amount of work to create is too large for our small group to think about doing now anyway.

@heavensrevenge
Copy link
Member

heavensrevenge commented Jan 18, 2024

@miquelfire Just tried replacing the tld's we have with the full public_suffix_list.dat data and interestingly there is no perf hit compared to the old list with how I'm testing it here: https://measurethat.net/Benchmarks/Show/29346/0/the-public-suffix-list-set-or-obj-loop-2 but not really sure if its worth an extra 138KB of TLD data.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants