61–70 of 126 posts
> While sophisticated users can turn to cloud-based “open resolvers” Sophisticated users run their own resolvers instead of relying on unverifiable promises from for-profit entities.
No, no no and no. It does not improve privacy, it just puts all your DNS history in the hands of one provider. Not only that it adds latency for no real gain. HTTP is a terrible protocol for anything time sensitive. (its a fairly bad protocol for anything fast or efficient full stop.) The better way to do this is encourage/provide DNSsec (so we know that a provider is who they say they are) and then encrypt dns queri…
I mean. I can't believe that there are going to be a lot of alternative providers. It's going to be an expensive service to provide. Especially when one of the requirements is that you can't mine the data to recuperate costs (and rightly so).
Why would I want my browser to do this? My browser should use the DNS configured by my OS -- in my case, a local, caching resolving NS. If I want to use some kind of DNS-over-HTTP I'll tell my OS to do it. I don't want my browser making DNS decisions for me. What am I missing?
I used this at some point on my Fedora laptop. I had issues on some hotel APs where it didn't allow me to see the 'login page' of the AP. What's the way to circumvent this problem? I'm frequently on public wifi's, so I need to access AP login pages without issue.
No, no no and no. It does not improve privacy, it just puts all your DNS history in the hands of one provider. Not only that it adds latency for no real gain. HTTP is a terrible protocol for anything time sensitive. (its a fairly bad protocol for anything fast or efficient full stop.) The better way to do this is encourage/provide DNSsec (so we know that a provider is who they say they are) and then encrypt dns queri…
No, no no and no. It does not improve privacy, it just puts all your DNS history in the hands of one provider. Not only that it adds latency for no real gain. HTTP is a terrible protocol for anything time sensitive. (its a fairly bad protocol for anything fast or efficient full stop.) The better way to do this is encourage/provide DNSsec (so we know that a provider is who they say they are) and then encrypt dns queri…
DNS over TLS exists as well. DNS over HTTPS is just another format for DNS over TLS.
Why would I want my browser to do this? My browser should use the DNS configured by my OS -- in my case, a local, caching resolving NS. If I want to use some kind of DNS-over-HTTP I'll tell my OS to do it. I don't want my browser making DNS decisions for me. What am I missing?
I used this at some point on my Fedora laptop. I had issues on some hotel APs where it didn't allow me to see the 'login page' of the AP. What's the way to circumvent this problem? I'm frequently on public wifi's, so I need to access AP login pages without issue.
Unfortunately that has turned into an arms race: some operating systems switch to a different browser when they detect a captive portal. So captive portals try to avoid detection, etc.
Basically what you want is package that tries to detect a captive portal and when it detects one alerts the user and offer to start a browser that uses the DHCP-supplied DNS resolvers to interact with the portal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
DNS over TLS exists as well. DNS over HTTPS is just another format for DNS over TLS.
In my opinion we don't want TLS at all, but rather a UDP based protocol, so that the latency advantages of DNS aren't lost. I believe DNSCurve solves this.
No, no no and no. It does not improve privacy, it just puts all your DNS history in the hands of one provider. Not only that it adds latency for no real gain. HTTP is a terrible protocol for anything time sensitive. (its a fairly bad protocol for anything fast or efficient full stop.) The better way to do this is encourage/provide DNSsec (so we know that a provider is who they say they are) and then encrypt dns queri…
And what happens when I stay at a hotel and need to access the login page of the local lan?
Why would I want my browser to do this? My browser should use the DNS configured by my OS -- in my case, a local, caching resolving NS. If I want to use some kind of DNS-over-HTTP I'll tell my OS to do it. I don't want my browser making DNS decisions for me. What am I missing?
I used this at some point on my Fedora laptop. I had issues on some hotel APs where it didn't allow me to see the 'login page' of the AP. What's the way to circumvent this problem? I'm frequently on public wifi's, so I need to access AP login pages without issue.