3 ms·

So you're saying that unencrypted DNS traffic is more secure than DNS traffic encrypted using questionable algorithms?

• peterwwillis 15y ago
  You have a weird way of reading. I don't see where I said that. Can you quote it for me?
  • SoftwareMaven 15y ago
    It's actually a pretty reasonable way to read it (it's the way I read it as well). You are obviously using DNS now, and since almost all DNS traffic today is unencrypted, it is a reason assumption to believe your traffic is currently unencrypted†. However, since you won't touch OpenDNS' encrypted DNS, the only logical reason for that is you feel unreviewed, encrypted DNS is more risky than the current unencrypted DNS. † That assumption is where things may break down, of course. If you are already using DNSSec, then the reading becomes "I trust DNSSec more than OpenDNS' unreviewed client."
    • peterwwillis 15y ago
      This 'logical conclusion' assumes I would make a comparison between two completely different use cases: wanting to encrypt my dns traffic and not wanting to encrypt my dns traffic. Saying one is better than the other is stupid because they're completely different things.
• JoshTriplett 15y ago
  In general, unencrypted traffic of any kind can have advantages over badly encrypted traffic: at least you know the unencrypted traffic has no security, and you can treat it accordingly. Badly encrypted traffic gives a false sense of security.
• zobzu 15y ago
  Actually i'd rather know my DNS traffic is insecure rather than believe its secure while it might not be. Then again, DNSCurve does not seems to be bad at all. In fact, it seems rather good.