451–460 of 519 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I assume he does not want support. He wants to highlight a threat to DNS choice.
The threat is actually more at IANA than DNS. I would not be surprised if ISP supplied routers would start MITM quad ip DNS servers in order to retake the data and control. A lot of harm will happen if that became standard practice. DNSSEC do not protect against this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you call Linux allowing you to specify a DNS server as "circumventing how the internet works at a pretty basic level", too? There's a vast difference between "users can configure it to what they want" and "it's hardcoded and can't be changed".
In both cases the client software ignored the network's settings. It's identical in behavior to the network. Either that's circumventing how the internet works or it isn't. Sounds like you agree that it's not, in fact, circumventing how the internet works?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're missing the part where 8.8.8.8 is a Google service for which an open, internet service already exists. If whatever Google's data centers are providing (besides 8.8.8.8) for the device's features also already had open implementations, then yes, the same complaint could be levied. By replacing parts of the internet that were open with non-open solutions, the intent and the consequence are clear. But I will say t…
Why do multiple DNS implementations exist? Why do multiple entities run different implementations? Does every DNS contain the same information, and do they all respond the same way? You might find Google's DNS privacy policy to be of interest: https://developers.google.com/speed/public-dns/privacy
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First they came for the appliances I don't want or need, because I don't use appliances I don't want or need. This has been discussed to death. Slippery slope, etc., etc.
I disagree. People who care about not hitting 8.8.8.8 simply do not own a Chromecast.
Knowing who he is, my takeaway should be, "Wow! An Internet Hall of Famer weighing in against a Google product!" But my actual takeaway is, "Legends of the CS world write informal, pithy rants to Google just like the rest of us mortals."
IETF should be concerned since one solution to this problem is to hijack the DNS. Namely 8.8.8.8
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And the OP was wrong; Chromecast Ultra is being sold here in Europe.
What? How do you know where OP lives or what is sold there? "Here" and "here" refer to different places depending on who is speaking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TIL! This upsets me more than the Chromecast using Google's DNS. I barely use Chrome anymore (just for testing really) but the thought that any domain I wish to go to can be overridden by the browser by default - that's scary. I mean what if Google doesn't like your website's content. They can block it on their DNS server and 99.999% of Chrome users would think something was wrong with your site. Thank you, I hate it…
I was thinking about buying a better network device for home and have VLANs and ACLs just to take control of my internet again. It is pretty annoying that Google not only trying to track me everywhere but actively overriding system wide settings to be able to get information what sites I am visiting.
More concerning to me was the fairly recent removal of non-phone-app setup. It used to be that a chromecast would display a 4 character code on screen, which could be used to activate it from the browser. Now, they require that it be managed with the google Home app, and have discontinued the method that allowed chromecast use without installing additional google software on your phone. This made for a really dishear…
More concerning to me was the fairly recent removal of non-phone-app setup. It used to be that a chromecast would display a 4 character code on screen, which could be used to activate it from the browser. Now, they require that it be managed with the google Home app, and have discontinued the method that allowed chromecast use without installing additional google software on your phone. This made for a really dishear…
Everybody could foresee "don't be evil" would die with the IPO. Not only that, but the spirit of young Google, like 20% time or Google Labs and off-the-wall ideas that could bubble up, all eventually died.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IETF should be concerned since one solution to this problem is to hijack the DNS. Namely 8.8.8.8
Right, realistically what Vixie is saying is: This is a major vendor failing to comply with IETF standards and using their market dominance to undermine open standards and protocols.
What IETF standard is violated by a device using a known DNS server rather than the one offered by DHCP?