3 ms·
Without a doubt, DNS-over-HTTPS introduces some major concerns from a network operator and security perspective. But I'm also very privacy focused, and am confl
by move-on-by 8y ago
Without a doubt, DNS-over-HTTPS introduces some major concerns from a network operator and security perspective. But I'm also very privacy focused, and am conflicted on the issue.
>[Mozilla] believe that they need to build technology that will accommodate a hostile network operator who is going to replace your DNS with things pointing to their advertising servers or is going to monitor what you do and send it off to some human rights violation team somewhere and so rather than tell you to use VPNs or tell you to use tor they decided to build DNS into the web
Requiring the average Joe to use a VPN service just so they can have some reasonable attempt at privacy isn't really an option, as we have seen. Privacy shouldn't be a luxury reserved only for those who can afford it. What I would really like to see is our lawmakers step up and make modern privacy laws with respect to technology and the data that results of it, but that clearly isn't happening. Unfortunately, DNS-over-HTTPS will very likely be used against the consumer in the long-run. Instead of using a pi-hole with port 53 blocked, I can see many devices will start using DNS-over-HTTPS to bypass those restrictions. Chromecast, rokus, and other devices already have hard-coded DNS addresses built-in, it won't be a very large step for them to switch to DNS-over-HTTPS to bypass my own network policies.
- roca 8y agoThe thing is, those devices are going to do that even if Mozilla drops DoH, the RFCs are burned and everyone responsible shot. So the options are: * Make DoH illegal somehow * Take advantage of it as best we can