3 ms·

Yes I think they will. Their positioning in the VPN, DNS, CDN and (soon) enterprise networking space will give them enormous visibility into a large fraction of

Yes I think they will. Their positioning in the VPN, DNS, CDN and (soon) enterprise networking space will give them enormous visibility into a large fraction of what is happening on the Internet, and I simply cannot believe that a profit-oriented company will turn away from such a market opportunity. Cloudflare isn’t really known as a privacy champion, they always put more emphasis on security, speed and reliability. From a privacy perspective it’s pretty horrible what they do as well, because they decrypt and inspect all traffic between their customers and those customers users. Security-wise it might be great, but don’t confuse security with privacy. I really hope that I’m wrong but I’m skeptical that Cloudflare will turn down such a big opportunity, and this move with DoH really seems to confirm this.

kbenson 7y ago
Mozilla has previously noted that Cloudfare is contractually obligated to keep the traffic private and not monetize or share it. That's not perfect, but without a law requiring it that's about the best you can get in the U.S. (assuming the contract has teeth in the penalties it imposes).
- nullc 7y ago
  I'd be willing to accept a lien on the homes of the senior cloudflare and mozilla executives with a contract that will forfeit the value of their homes and allow me to sell them and donate the funds to charity, should it be demonstrated that Firefox-Cloudflare DoH is being used to surveil users. There are many things that could be done. The problem is that the promises they make sound grand but aren't real, they wouldn't put the value of their homes at risk (nor would I encourage them to, I'd encourage them to not put themselves in a position where they could be forced to compromise the privacy of the public like this) ---- yet some user's lives can be put at risk by privacy-failures of their service.
  - jlgaddis 7y ago
    That would certainly give a new meaning to "we take security seriously" -- one I would also love to see!
- syshum 7y ago
  That is pointless, Contracts are only valid if they have teeth, and I highly doubt CloudFlare agreed to any contract that exposes them to huge financial liability So the question is "What happens when CloudFlare violates the contract" do they get a strongly worded email from Mozilla? bad PR? Or is it s bankruptcy causing event for the company. Anything besides that means the contract is worthless

kbenson 7y ago

Mozilla has previously noted that Cloudfare is contractually obligated to keep the traffic private and not monetize or share it. That's not perfect, but without a law requiring it that's about the best you can get in the U.S. (assuming the contract has teeth in the penalties it imposes).

nullc 7y ago
I'd be willing to accept a lien on the homes of the senior cloudflare and mozilla executives with a contract that will forfeit the value of their homes and allow me to sell them and donate the funds to charity, should it be demonstrated that Firefox-Cloudflare DoH is being used to surveil users. There are many things that could be done. The problem is that the promises they make sound grand but aren't real, they wouldn't put the value of their homes at risk (nor would I encourage them to, I'd encourage them to not put themselves in a position where they could be forced to compromise the privacy of the public like this) ---- yet some user's lives can be put at risk by privacy-failures of their service.
- jlgaddis 7y ago
  That would certainly give a new meaning to "we take security seriously" -- one I would also love to see!
syshum 7y ago
That is pointless, Contracts are only valid if they have teeth, and I highly doubt CloudFlare agreed to any contract that exposes them to huge financial liability So the question is "What happens when CloudFlare violates the contract" do they get a strongly worded email from Mozilla? bad PR? Or is it s bankruptcy causing event for the company. Anything besides that means the contract is worthless