3 ms·
I guess it's often much simpler and cheaper to not try to hide it. The CNAME practice is becoming more and more common. See https://blog.apnic.net/2020/08/04/c
by speedgoose 6y ago
I guess it's often much simpler and cheaper to not try to hide it.
The CNAME practice is becoming more and more common. See https://blog.apnic.net/2020/08/04/characterizing-cname-cloaking-based-tracking/ https://blog.apnic.net/2020/08/04/characterizing-cname-cloak... or https://medium.com/nextdns/cname-cloaking-the-dangerous-disguise-of-third-party-trackers-195205dc522a https://medium.com/nextdns/cname-cloaking-the-dangerous-disg... or https://www.laquadrature.net/2020/10/05/le-deguisement-des-trackers-par-cname/ https://www.laquadrature.net/2020/10/05/le-deguisement-des-t...
I think proxying or doing it server side only will be implemented later when these people will be forced to hide to save their shitty business model.
- Sayrus 6y agoCNAME cloacking has gone even further, ad company now ask you to put a A/AAAA record pointing to one of their IPs as CNAME uncloaking was working pretty well.
- _-david-_ 6y agoI think the move will be for ANAME records. ANAME is not a real record (yet), but some providers are supporting them. It is similar to a CNAME record but instead of storing the domain name you want to map to it pulls the A record and puts that IP as your A record.