4 ms·
I disagree. The claim is about a loss of control for "end users" – but it's really a loss of control for network administrators. If I run Firefox on someone e
by comex 7y ago
I disagree. The claim is about a loss of control for "end users" – but it's really a loss of control for network administrators. If I run Firefox on someone else's network and DoH lets me circumvent a filtering proxy, that's handing control away from the network administrator towards me, the end user. Same goes if the network administrator is "just" logging DNS queries, at the cost of my privacy.
It so happens that many of the people who post on this site actively administrate at least a home network for which they are also end users. But even in that rarified group, how many people don't connect their computers to untrusted Wi-Fi networks, regularly or at least occasionally? I'd guess it's a pretty low fraction. And among Firefox users in general, the fraction that has meaningful input over the configuration of any network they connect to is surely negligible. (Owning a router doesn't count if you don't know how to configure it.)
If you're really an end user, then you'll always have the ability to change Firefox's settings to turn off DoH, or point it at whatever server you want. It's only if you're trying to monitor someone else's connections that you're out of luck.
- TeMPOraL 7y ago> If you're really an end user, then you'll always have the ability to change Firefox's settings to turn off DoH, or point it at whatever server you want. But will you, even in a year or five from now? And in the broader discussion of DoH-in-browsers, will the same be true about Chrome? (I believe the answers are "maybe" and "not likely", respectively.)