31–40 of 191 posts
This way, no privacy problems, you're directly contacting authoritarive servers. And you don't rely on a single dns-over-https provider.
Is the latency a big problem there? I would say that with caching it is not too bad.
There's a lot of negativity here. But this is a win overall for privacy. DNS is used by ISPs to sell user's data and is one way that oppressive regimes track what their users do. If you're technical enough to understand DNS then you are smart enough to change what the default is. If you're a system administrator for a company. You should be able to push a profile down to the user's computer to configure DNS how you w…
Well, DoH effectively bypass DNS-filters set up by countries. While some are questionable, I believe it won't take long until Mozilla ends up with some bad press, and being an underdog it doesn't need that.
After all privacy is the goal, isn't it?
Why don't they rather include a resolver in Firefox ? This way, no privacy problems, you're directly contacting authoritarive servers. And you don't rely on a single dns-over-https provider. Is the latency a big problem there? I would say that with caching it is not too bad.
There's a lot of negativity here. But this is a win overall for privacy. DNS is used by ISPs to sell user's data and is one way that oppressive regimes track what their users do. If you're technical enough to understand DNS then you are smart enough to change what the default is. If you're a system administrator for a company. You should be able to push a profile down to the user's computer to configure DNS how you w…
Well, DoH effectively bypass DNS-filters set up by countries. While some are questionable, I believe it won't take long until Mozilla ends up with some bad press, and being an underdog it doesn't need that.
I didn't see it mentioned in the article. Has Mozilla said whose servers they will be sending unsuspecting users queries to by default? (IIRC, it was Cloudflare previously. Any reason to believe this has changed?) --- If, like me, you already have a solution in place you are happy with and don't like the idea of others (deciding they know what's best for you and) circumventing it, simply ensure that your existing res…
If true that DoH can be disabled at network level, ad-blocking solutions like pihole should probably implement it by default. Anyone have any idea if this is the case? That would at least save me a lot of trouble and work.
But for a browser, an ad-blocking extension works better and is less than a minute to set up. Why force it to use the same DNS blocking?
Why don't they rather include a resolver in Firefox ? This way, no privacy problems, you're directly contacting authoritarive servers. And you don't rely on a single dns-over-https provider. Is the latency a big problem there? I would say that with caching it is not too bad.
There's a lot of negativity here. But this is a win overall for privacy. DNS is used by ISPs to sell user's data and is one way that oppressive regimes track what their users do. If you're technical enough to understand DNS then you are smart enough to change what the default is. If you're a system administrator for a company. You should be able to push a profile down to the user's computer to configure DNS how you w…
I didn't see it mentioned in the article. Has Mozilla said whose servers they will be sending unsuspecting users queries to by default? (IIRC, it was Cloudflare previously. Any reason to believe this has changed?) --- If, like me, you already have a solution in place you are happy with and don't like the idea of others (deciding they know what's best for you and) circumventing it, simply ensure that your existing res…
If true that DoH can be disabled at network level, ad-blocking solutions like pihole should probably implement it by default. Anyone have any idea if this is the case? That would at least save me a lot of trouble and work.