Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

1.1.1.1: Fast, privacy-first consumer DNS service

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 695 posts

Re: 1.1.1.1: Fast, privacy-first consumer DNS service

#191

Post by avip »

dieulot wrote: post #144
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #116

TIL you can also use 1.1 and it will expand to 1.0.0.1 $> ping 1.1 PING 1.1 (1.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=28.3 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=33.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=43.6 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=41.7 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=56.5 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 t…

The most useful case for this shortcut is 127.1 -> 127.0.0.1

Don't try that in the wild, most sw out there would ignore spec and use some arbitrary regex to validate IP format.

i.e python:

    octets = ip_str.split('.')
    if len(octets) != 4:
        raise AddressValueError("Expected 4 octets in %r" % ip_str)

Re: 1.1.1.1: Fast, privacy-first consumer DNS service

#192

Post by fwgwgwgch »

dieulot wrote: post #144
DyslexicAtheist wrote: post #116

TIL you can also use 1.1 and it will expand to 1.0.0.1 $> ping 1.1 PING 1.1 (1.0.0.1) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=55 time=28.3 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=55 time=33.0 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=55 time=43.6 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=55 time=41.7 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=55 time=56.5 ms 64 bytes from 1.0.0.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=55 t…

The most useful case for this shortcut is 127.1 -> 127.0.0.1

Where have you been all my life?

Re: 1.1.1.1: Fast, privacy-first consumer DNS service

#194

Post by throw2016 »

akquise wrote: post #120
cptskippy wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole point of encrypting DNS traffic is to hide it from the likes of Google.

For me personally it is much more important to hide my DNS traffic from my ISP instead of Google, etc., even though I don't live in the US. I pay them to access the internet, every further information they gather about my internet activity does not mean any benefit for me.

This does not make sense. Either people are not concerned about hiding their traffic or if they are it follows they would be equally if not much more concerned about Google that can track them across devices and build far more indepth invasive profiles than the ISP.

Aside it's strange https everywhere has been pushed aggressively by many here under the bogeyman of ISP adware and spying while completely ignoring the much larger adware and privacy threats posed by the stalking of Google, Facebook and others. It is disingenuous and insincere.

Re: 1.1.1.1: Fast, privacy-first consumer DNS service

#197

Post by markonen »

opencl wrote: post #179
akquise wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me personally it is much more important to hide my DNS traffic from my ISP instead of Google, etc., even though I don't live in the US. I pay them to access the internet, every further information they gather about my internet activity does not mean any benefit for me.

Hiding DNS traffic from your ISP is pointless when you have to give them the IP that gets resolved anyway for them to route your traffic.

Not really. Typically the query includes much more information (the site you want to visit) than the response (an IP potentially shared by thousands or millions of sites).

Re: 1.1.1.1: Fast, privacy-first consumer DNS service

#199

Post by ocdtrekkie »

bogomipz wrote: post #154
heisenbit wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are NOT saying Google is lying and collecting the data. They are saying the business model of Google inherently provides such incentive. Cloudflare is somewhat right: Means, Motive and Opportunity - but for a conviction you have to prove someone acted on the Opportunity. The Motive of Google is tampered with severe risk for loosing trust. Cloudflare can make an argument they are fundamentally better positioned a…

>"They are NOT saying Google is lying and collecting the data." The OP did not say that cloudflare is "saying" that. The OP very clearly said they are "insinuating" it. And yes under the heading "DNS's Privacy Problem" the post mentions: "With all the concern over the data that companies like Facebook and Google are collecting on you,..." I think that juxtaposition of this statement under a bolded heading of "DNS's P…

Bear in mind, Google's changed its mind before and can again at any time. For instance, when they bought DoubleClick they promised not to connect it with the Google account data they had. Then they changed that policy later.
Post reply on HN