4 ms·
Phishing Protection – Comparing DNS Security Filters
- ttul 8y agoThis is not very scientific.
- PenguinCoder 8y agoAgreed, and very light on the technical. A few months ago when I was working on setting up a pi-hole with and testing DNS blocking, I came across a few articles like this. Long story short, I could not find a -verifiable-, in depth and even slightly scientific method approved study for the major free services. Ended up going with blocklist on the pi-hole and using quad-9 just for the DNSSEC addition. No problems so far, and not buying into the other snake oil.
- philip1209 8y agoI doubt that the free OpenDNS is maintained now.
- tbyehl 8y agoIt is, but the OpenDNS resolver tested is for FamilyShield which is only advertised as blocking "Tasteless, Proxy/Anonymizer, Sexuality and Pornography."
- badrabbit 8y agoYou should consider that only a very small amount of phishing domains and URLs ever make it to phishtank,openphish and similar services. I welcome what the author is doing but you need to do a bit more for phishing protection, like blocking newly registered and/or uncategorized domains. I wonder if there are browser extensions for this sort of stuff?
- gif653490 8y agoYes there are browser extensions that offer phishing/malware protection https://malwaretips.com/threads/updated-3-6-18-browser-extension-comparison-malwares-and-phishings.80915/page-5#post-739934 https://malwaretips.com/threads/updated-3-6-18-browser-exten...
- Khaine 8y agoYou could block all domains that are not part of the Majestic Millions[1] (the million most common domains) [1] https://majestic.com/reports/majestic-million https://majestic.com/reports/majestic-million
- Fnoord 8y agoWhat about false positives?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]