11 ms·

is it blocking anything? It was one of a shopping list of requirements that it be capable of complying with court orders. I expect they don't want to repeat the

• AnthonyMouse 3y ago
  > is it blocking anything? It was one of a shopping list of requirements that it be capable of complying with court orders. Presumably the court orders would be to block things, right? > I expect they don't want to repeat the Quad9 situation, where it just blocked requests from all of Germany. Best way to resolve this is to not have laws requiring DNS servers to censor things, and make those laws as inconvenient to enforce as possible to encourage that outcome. > And as others in the thread mention, things that court orders may block aren't just torrents - eg malware. But as soon as they start blocking torrents then people stop using it and it can no longer block malware. > Also, given that it's mainly aimed (so far) at government departments and telcos, it's not clear that that would reduce adoption at all. Users can choose not to use their telco's DNS if it starts blocking things they don't want it to, which in turn limits use of the service by end users. It may even limit use of the service by telcos if they get customer complaints or notice that customers are switching from their DNS, which they don't want if they're redirecting NXDOMAIN to ad spam or using/selling DNS query data etc.