Handshakes and Blockchain Domains Decentralizing Name Resolution

The internet’s domain name system has long been a model of global coordination, balancing openness with structure, and utility with stability. However, it remains fundamentally centralized, governed by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and executed through a hierarchy of registries, registrars, and DNS root servers. In recent years, a new movement has emerged that challenges this model by proposing a radically decentralized approach to name resolution through blockchain technology. Handshake and other blockchain-based domain systems aim to redefine how online identities and destinations are managed, verified, and accessed—offering a direct philosophical and technical alternative not only to ICANN-managed domains but also to platform-bound social media handles.

Handshake is a decentralized, permissionless naming protocol that uses blockchain to create and manage top-level domain (TLD) names. Rather than relying on a central authority to allocate TLDs, Handshake employs an auction mechanism where participants bid for ownership of names recorded on its blockchain. Once a user wins a bid for a name, it is permanently assigned to their cryptographic key pair, which they control entirely. This approach removes ICANN and traditional registrars from the equation, placing full ownership and governance of a domain into the hands of the individual or organization that acquired it. Ownership on Handshake is not leased or rented—it is cryptographically and immutably recorded, and resistant to censorship or seizure by governments or corporations.

Blockchain domains registered through systems like Handshake, Ethereum Name Service (ENS), or Unstoppable Domains function similarly to traditional domains at a conceptual level but diverge sharply in architecture. Instead of resolving through the traditional DNS root zone and its associated servers, blockchain domains are resolved via decentralized networks and require compatible resolvers or browser extensions to function in standard web browsers. Some modern browsers have begun experimenting with native support for blockchain domains, allowing users to access .crypto, .eth, or .hns domains directly without extra configuration. This enables websites, wallets, and decentralized applications (dApps) to be hosted and accessed entirely outside of the conventional DNS hierarchy.

One of the most significant implications of blockchain-based domains is censorship resistance. Because ownership is tied to cryptographic keys and stored on a decentralized ledger, no single entity can unilaterally revoke or suspend a domain. This stands in sharp contrast to traditional domains, which can be seized or redirected by registrars, registries, or state actors under legal or political pressure. Similarly, social media handles exist solely within the control of platform providers. They can be removed, reassigned, or banned without warning, often in response to content moderation policies or algorithmic enforcement. In this way, blockchain domains offer a level of digital sovereignty that neither ICANN domains nor social media handles can guarantee.

This decentralization extends to the resolution process itself. Traditional DNS relies on a tree structure rooted in 13 logical root servers, with queries passed through a predictable hierarchy. Blockchain domains are resolved through peer-to-peer networks or through gateways that map blockchain records into DNS-like responses. This eliminates the reliance on any central infrastructure, reducing the risk of systemic outages or coordinated censorship. It also empowers users to run their own resolvers or rely on community-run infrastructure, creating a more distributed and resilient web.

However, decentralization also comes with trade-offs. Blockchain domains lack the maturity, global support, and integration of the legacy DNS. They are not universally recognized, do not function reliably across all browsers and devices, and often lack the familiar tooling that businesses depend on—such as standardized WHOIS services, enterprise-level DNS management, and SSL certificate authorities. Despite these limitations, innovation continues at a rapid pace. Some blockchain domain systems support integrated cryptographic services such as automatic TLS encryption, wallet address resolution, and content hashing for use with decentralized storage networks like IPFS. This ties naming, identity, and content together in a cohesive, self-sovereign model.

The contrast with social media handles is particularly sharp. While blockchain domains offer control and permanence, social media usernames are ephemeral, context-dependent, and fully controlled by corporate interests. A user may build an audience of millions under a handle like @example, only to lose it due to policy violations, account compromise, or changes in platform rules. There is no portability of handles across platforms, no cryptographic proof of ownership, and no concept of truly owning the identifier. Blockchain domains, once claimed and recorded, are as portable and secure as the keys used to manage them. They can be transferred, inherited, or used across various decentralized applications, serving as persistent anchors of identity in a fragmented digital landscape.

Furthermore, blockchain domains are redefining what a domain can be. Traditional domains map names to IP addresses and serve web or email traffic. Blockchain domains can map names to wallet addresses, smart contracts, encrypted messages, or even other blockchain assets. A domain name like alice.eth can simultaneously serve as a website, a cryptocurrency wallet, a login credential, and a digital business card. This convergence of identity, communication, and finance under a single, user-controlled namespace reflects a broader shift toward decentralized identity (DID) systems, where users manage their own data and interactions without reliance on central authorities.

In a future where decentralized networks become more integral to everyday internet use, the distinction between blockchain domains and traditional domains will continue to blur. Gateway services that bridge DNS and blockchain namespaces are already emerging, and major registrars are exploring ways to integrate decentralized naming into their offerings. Still, the philosophical divergence remains profound. Traditional DNS offers structure, legal recourse, and global recognition but depends on trust in centralized governance. Blockchain domains offer autonomy, permanence, and resistance to censorship, but at the cost of complexity and adoption barriers.

Ultimately, the rise of systems like Handshake reflects a deep desire to reclaim control over digital identity and infrastructure. Where social media handles serve as rented identities inside gated ecosystems, and traditional domains exist within managed hierarchies, blockchain domains promise a world in which naming is open, borderless, and user-owned. As technology continues to evolve, the question is not just how we name things online—but who has the authority to decide what those names mean, where they point, and who gets to use them. In that answer lies the future of internet governance itself.

The internet’s domain name system has long been a model of global coordination, balancing openness with structure, and utility with stability. However, it remains fundamentally centralized, governed by the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) and executed through a hierarchy of registries, registrars, and DNS root servers. In recent years, a new movement…