3 ms·
Well, it's not like they were forced to do name resolution over DNS before... They could just as well deploy their own custom name resolvers and talk to them vi
by dbrgn 6y ago
Well, it's not like they were forced to do name resolution over DNS before... They could just as well deploy their own custom name resolvers and talk to them via IP from applications like YouTube for Android.
The scenario you're describing (DNS-level blocks) could always be circumvented.
On the other hand, if you live in the US and don't override the ISP's name servers, most probably they will spy on you and sometimes even do things like injecting ads into third party websites. This was the thing DoH was meant to solve.
- kuschku 6y ago> They could just as well deploy their own custom name resolvers and talk to them via IP from applications like YouTube for Android. The Chromecast has 8.8.8.8 hardcoded, but recently an ISP started integrating ad-blocking via DNS filtering (with 8.8.8.8 MitM) in their ISP routers. That case actually went to court. It'll always be possible to do the filtering as prosumer, but the current state of the art of "it just works" ad blockers is something Google is fighting against (also see Manifest v3)
- judge2020 6y agoYour response to the first scenario didn’t invalidate it - Google could have made a https://dns.google.com https://dns.google.com endpoint in 2013 before DOH and only allowed the Chromecast to work if it could get dns responses from there.
- kuschku 6y agoYeah but that would require developers intentionally building an anti-adblock solution, while funding a solution like DoH allows Google to save face