CybersecKyle<p><span class="h-card" translate="no"><a href="https://mastodon.ar.al/@aral" class="u-url mention" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">@<span>aral</span></a></span> Great point — and I agree that most users would be suspicious if they saw an IP address like 89.72.4.2 instead of a familiar domain like mybank.com. The concern raised in the article, though, was more about scenarios where users don’t see the link clearly — such as in emails, PDFs, or messaging apps where URLs may be masked behind anchor text or shortened links. For example, a phishing email might show a link that says “View Invoice” but actually points to https: //203.0.113.10/login.</p><p>Experienced users like you and I know to hover over links, check certificate info, or inspect the address bar. But many users don’t do that — or worse, they click links without verifying anything. According to the Verizon DBIR and other phishing studies, this is still one of the top attack vectors today.</p><p>Also, I don’t think the article was arguing against IP certs outright — just highlighting that, like with any new capability, there's potential for abuse that the broader public (and infosec community) should be aware of.</p><p><a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/CyberSecurity" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>CyberSecurity</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/Phishing" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>Phishing</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/DigitalTrust" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>DigitalTrust</span></a> <a href="https://infosec.exchange/tags/TLS" class="mention hashtag" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">#<span>TLS</span></a></p>