IDN is crazy
Yeah, IDNs should have never happened. Homograph attacks alone are reason enough for IDNs to be a terrible idea, and they cannot be fully prevented even with special rules, because different fonts might render distinct characters similarly that are not normally considered "homographs".<p>I feel IDNs are part of a larger trend of "Unicode should be <i>everywhere</i>", without any consideration for whether this is actually a good idea. Programming languages are guilty of this too, with many allowing almost any Unicode codepoint in identifiers. This has created an entirely new class of security vulnerabilities that are serious enough that VSCode now flags such codepoints by default if they look similar to certain ASCII characters.<p>Basic ASCII Latin characters are the <i>only</i> characters that can be entered using almost any input device in existence without additional tools or configuration. This makes them a universal baseline, and software should carefully consider whether deviating from that baseline is really worth the security vulnerabilities and incompatibilities it may introduce, just so people can write their source code comments in Vedic Sanskrit, for a programming language where every keyword and almost every function name is in English.