Closed pcarrier closed 2 months ago
If you are trying to get around limitations by cloudflare and letsencrypt you should contact them. If you are not, you should remove those entries.
@pcarrier ping
Why should I remove the entries? Is it not a good idea to prevent cookie pollution? What changed since the last addition, feels a bit arbitrary?
What changed is that we added specific examples to the template:
- [x] We are listing any third-party limits that we seek to work around in our rationale such as those between IOS 14.5+ and Facebook (see Issue #1245 as a well-documented example)
- Cloudflare
- Letsencrypt
- <UPDATE THIS LIST WITH YOUR LIMITATIONS!>
Which are apparently not sufficiently clear but if the examples don't apply to you, you should remove them. (I was talking about these examples when I said "entries" not about your PSL entries.)
Ah sorry, I thought I had done that by not listing anything myself, should have reread the submission after your comment. Updated!
Public Suffix List (PSL) Pull Request (PR) Template
Each PSL PR needs to have a description, rationale, indication of DNS validation and syntax checking, as well as a number of acknowledgements from the submitter. This template must be included with each PR, and the submitting party MUST provide responses to all of the elements in order to be considered.
Checklist of required steps
[x] Description of Organization
[x] Robust Reason for PSL Inclusion
[x] DNS verification via dig
[x] Run Syntax Checker (make test)
[x] Each domain listed in the PRIVATE section has and shall maintain at least two years remaining on registration, and we shall keep the _PSL txt record in place in the respective zone(s) in the affected section
Submitter affirms the following:
For Private section requests that are submitting entries for domains that match their organization website's primary domain, please understand that this can have impacts that may not match the desired outcome and take a long time to rollback, if at all.
To ensure that requested changes are entirely intentional, make sure that you read the affectation and propagation expectations, that you understand them, and confirm this understanding.
PR Rollbacks have lower priority, and the volunteers are unable to control when or if browsers or other parties using the PSL will refresh or update.
(Link: about propagation/expectations)
[x] Yes, I understand. I could break my organization's website cookies etc. and the rollback timing, etc is acceptable. Proceed.
Description of Organization
Organization Website: https://pcarrier.com/
pcarrier.ca Software Inc., which I operate currently single-handedly, provides free Internet services. In particular, https://xmit.co/ is a hosting platform for static websites. madethis.site subdomains are available to its customers on a first-come,-first-serve basis for completely free websites.
Reason for PSL Inclusion
Cookie Security. We let multiple parties host different websites and do not want cookie pollution, or the risk of leaking cookies across domains.
Please note that this is the continuation of https://github.com/publicsuffix/list/pull/1972
Number of users this request is being made to serve: Currently only 10 active users, but we expect growth, particularly as entirely free hosting (domain name included) becomes publicly available.
DNS Verification via dig
Results of Syntax Checker (
make test
)