A browser-history survey found that approximately 8% of domain name resolutions involved typing in a genuinely new domain not reachable via an existing link, meaning a SDSI/petname delegation-based name system could serve roughly 92% of real-world Web navigation without requiring any out-of-band key exchange.

In a DHT-based censorship-resistant name system, poisoning attacks (injecting invalid mappings) are neutralized by requiring signature verification on stored values; eclipse attacks (isolating specific mappings from the network) require replication across multiple DHT nodes. Critically, decentralizing lookups from a single ISP resolver to a DHT shifts query visibility from ISPs to arbitrary peers, requiring per-query encryption keyed to secrets known only to the querying client to limit adversaries to confirmation attacks.

§4.4 defense

DNSSEC's hierarchical delegation structure provides no protection against state-level censors: governments can legally compel top-level domain operators to alter records, and coerced results still validate because they are signed by the coerced-but-technically-legitimate authority — making end-to-end DNSSEC security insufficient to detect such attacks.

§3.1 detection

Pseudo-TLDs (e.g., '.key' for cryptographic-identifier namespaces, '.pet' for petname systems) allow multiple censorship-resistant name systems with distinct security trade-offs to coexist transparently alongside DNS via Name Service Switch configuration, with system-specific resolution logic applied per TLD and no application reconfiguration required by users.

§4.1 defense

In an adversary model where the censor may hold more computational power than all honest nodes combined, a squatting attack lets the adversary enumerate and pre-register every memorable name, formally proving it is impossible to simultaneously achieve memorable, secure, and global names in a single name system (Zooko's triangle).

§3 policy