3 ms·

Because, as an example, as a person responsible for network at my house, I do not want to check whether my child installed another app and check each app one by

Because, as an example, as a person responsible for network at my house, I do not want to check whether my child installed another app and check each app one by one ( and that check has to be done and redone every time something changes or someone touches the app ). I want one global setting that says 'Non possumus'. edit: Unless, naturally, I am no longer an admin and any control I have over my hardware is merely an illusion.

Brian_K_White 2y ago
I hate to break it to you, but there is nothing special about hostnames and ips. They are just a tiny bit of key=value data that can be stored or transmitted infinitely different ways. dns and doh are nothing but convenient standards that no one and no app actually has to use. It doesn't matter how much you might want otherwise. It doesn't matter how important and virtuous the reason you want it is. Even invoking the mighty untouchable power of "my daughter" does not change such a simple fact of life.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 2y ago
  It seems like we are arguing for the same outcome. I want to be able to control things within my control. Based on what your wrote, it seems you would support that?
  - Brian_K_White 2y ago
    The question has no meaning. "control things within your control" is like a truism, grammatically and logically valid yet says nothing. The point was that it's pointless to even think in terms of "apps and devices going around my choke point" because there never was a choke point in the first place. If you want to prevent an app or device on your network from accessing an IP, you must 1: Ensure the app or device has no wifi or cell or any other possible physical connection of it's own that could allow it to reach the internet without going through your router. 2: Block the ip, by ip, in your router, and also any other ip that could serve as a proxy or relay. It is impossible to know what all those IPs are, so what is possible instead is whitelisting instead of blacklisting. You could do that, but was it useful or interesting to even say? Didn't you and everyone else already know all that?
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 2y ago
      << It is impossible to know what all those IPs are, so what is possible instead is whitelisting instead of blacklisting. << The point was that it's pointless to even think in terms of "apps and devices going around my choke point" because there never was a choke point in the first place. I am not sure why I detect snark. Either it is possible or it is not possible. You argue that we can only assume that things are not communicating with outside world is if there is no network to begin with, which is not completely unreasonable position to take knowing what we know -- cat and mouse gaming being what it is. But even that is slowly becoming less of an option. << You could do that, but was it useful or interesting to even say? Are you suggesting that this conversation is pointless? I don't see it that way. edit: after all, I am participating in this exchange.

Brian_K_White 2y ago

I hate to break it to you, but there is nothing special about hostnames and ips. They are just a tiny bit of key=value data that can be stored or transmitted infinitely different ways. dns and doh are nothing but convenient standards that no one and no app actually has to use. It doesn't matter how much you might want otherwise. It doesn't matter how important and virtuous the reason you want it is. Even invoking the mighty untouchable power of "my daughter" does not change such a simple fact of life.

A4ET8a8uTh0 2y ago
It seems like we are arguing for the same outcome. I want to be able to control things within my control. Based on what your wrote, it seems you would support that?
- Brian_K_White 2y ago
  The question has no meaning. "control things within your control" is like a truism, grammatically and logically valid yet says nothing. The point was that it's pointless to even think in terms of "apps and devices going around my choke point" because there never was a choke point in the first place. If you want to prevent an app or device on your network from accessing an IP, you must 1: Ensure the app or device has no wifi or cell or any other possible physical connection of it's own that could allow it to reach the internet without going through your router. 2: Block the ip, by ip, in your router, and also any other ip that could serve as a proxy or relay. It is impossible to know what all those IPs are, so what is possible instead is whitelisting instead of blacklisting. You could do that, but was it useful or interesting to even say? Didn't you and everyone else already know all that?
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 2y ago
    << It is impossible to know what all those IPs are, so what is possible instead is whitelisting instead of blacklisting. << The point was that it's pointless to even think in terms of "apps and devices going around my choke point" because there never was a choke point in the first place. I am not sure why I detect snark. Either it is possible or it is not possible. You argue that we can only assume that things are not communicating with outside world is if there is no network to begin with, which is not completely unreasonable position to take knowing what we know -- cat and mouse gaming being what it is. But even that is slowly becoming less of an option. << You could do that, but was it useful or interesting to even say? Are you suggesting that this conversation is pointless? I don't see it that way. edit: after all, I am participating in this exchange.