5 ms·
That way the ISP still sees what you're doing though.
by chpatrick 3y ago
That way the ISP still sees what you're doing though.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- acchow 3y agoOnly the DNS lookups. Not the content of what you’re viewing over https. Everything after domain name is encrypted
- freedomben 3y agoThe DNS lookup are often enough. You can try to claim you were shopping for new shoes on pornhub.com, but not many people will buy it
- nurettin 3y agoThere is no law against going to pornhub.com, the law is only concerned with dns blocking.
- alhadrad 3y ago[flagged]
- godelski 3y agoSupposing this was 100% accurate, I'm sure that you could understand that going to pornhub.com or definitelynotgayporn.net would arouse suspicion in a government that is banning such behavior and could cause a person to be under higher scrutiny. So even if you're right that the DNS bypass isn't what would technically get them in trouble, I think you can understand the motivation to encrypt your DNS traffic to ensure that you don't get a target painted on your back. And given this, I hope how you can understand that your comment does very little to contribute to the actual conversation and can even potentially mislead others. A lot of communication is implicit (otherwise it'd be incredibly cumbersome)
- nurettin 3y agoMisleading and disinformation also comes in the form of FUD, does it not?
- godelski 3y agoYou're going to have to clarify what the misleading/disinformation/FUD is. Because I don't see it.
- nurettin 3y agoJust read Every Single Suggestion in your reply. > going to pornhub.com or definitelynotgayporn.net would arouse suspicion in a government that is banning such behavior dns blocking doesn't mean adults are banned from visiting porn sites. You start by contradicting your initial concession of assuming this is 100% accurate. > and could cause a person to be under higher scrutiny. So even if you're right that the DNS bypass isn't what would technically get them in trouble, I think you can understand the motivation to encrypt your DNS traffic to ensure that you don't get a target painted on your back. This is a prime example of Fear and uncertainty. > And given this, I hope how you can understand that your comment does very little to contribute to the actual conversation and can even potentially mislead others. A lot of communication is implicit (otherwise it'd be incredibly cumbersome) And this is doubt. Never fails to accompany the other two.
- bawolff 3y agoI feel like the type of places with heavy handed censorship are also not the type of places you want to go "well, actually..." to the government.
- nurettin 3y agoThat approach is way too apprehensive. Those idiots tried to block google docs once. It didn't go well as you might imagine. ERs, research institutes and several government facilities responded with cordial letters about the court's mental state. Then it was unblocked. The reason they get to keep the porn bans is because it isn't enforced upon adults, and it does serve as a thin layer of protection against minors.
- tawai 3y ago[flagged]
- acchow 3y agoWatching for the plot…
- toast0 3y agoI was just shopping for cpu cooling at OnlyFans?
- omoikane 3y agoYou could say you were learning math: https://kotaku.com/on-pornhub-math-teacher-makes-his-mark-teaching-calcul-1847927535 https://kotaku.com/on-pornhub-math-teacher-makes-his-mark-te... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28934711 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28934711
- baobabKoodaa 3y agoWell, in some parts of the world the lie may be "I was watching 100% straight heterosexual porn, no homo". So a DNS lookup to pornhub.com does not reveal the lie.
- semi 3y agoor just claim ignorance. or the opposite and claim browser DNS prefetching when a blog spam comment linked to pornhub
- slt2021 3y agoSNI header from TLS handshake is unencrypted so service providers (and Government's packet inspection engines) absolutely do see what website you are visiting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Name_Indication Server Name Indication payload is not encrypted, thus the hostname of the server the client tries to connect to is visible to a passive eavesdropper. This protocol weakness was exploited by security software for network filtering and monitoring[4][5][6] and governments to implement censorship.[7] Presently, there are multiple technologies attempting to hide Server Name Indication. Also some countries may mandate users to install and trust government's CA certificate which is then used to MITM HTTPS traffic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakhstan_man-in-the-middle_attack https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kazakhstan_man-in-the-middle_a...
- acchow 3y agoBut the SNI hostname will only include everything left of the TLD. So that is the TLD, the domain name, and the subdomain. It excludes the rest of the URL. If you have installed a root cert to allow the government to MITM, then there isn't really anything you can do...
- slt2021 3y agoSNI is enough to classify traffic for enforcement purposes. dont forget that if certain SNI is detected, your ISP/government may try to force downgrade TLS or replace server-hello with their own cert - meaning you will need to install government certificate to browse certain websites and 99% of users will do that to get access