6 ms·
David Ulevitch: Some thoughts on Google DNS
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- phsr 17y agoDavid's 5th point is the most important, at least in my opinion. By Google running DNS, they can potentially collect your complete browsing behavior (since you'll go through their server all the time, not only when you search with them).
- robotron 17y agohttp://code.google.com/speed/public-dns/privacy.html http://code.google.com/speed/public-dns/privacy.html
- tptacek 17y agoCompare to: http://www.opendns.com/privacy/ http://www.opendns.com/privacy/ Heh.
- chris100 17y agoNot to be paranoid, but where does it say that their privacy policy won't change? Right now, the privacy policy looks great on the surface. They are launching a new product. But you can't deny that Google's entire DNA is to extract monetizable information from huge amount of seemlingly unrelated raw data. That's why you have to take their privacy policy with a grain of salt.
- bm98 17y agoIf Google deletes all of its personally-identifiable data within 48 hours, then the risk to current users of any future privacy policy change is small. The real problem is when a service collects -- and never purges -- data under the guise of one privacy policy, but leaves the door open to adopting a different privacy policy which could be retroactively applied to the data already collected. I'm no lawyer, but the OpenDNS privacy policy does appear to fall into that category: "Your continued use of our sites and services after any change in this Privacy Policy will constitute your acceptance of such change." Right, and if I stop using the service when the policy changes, will my old data be automatically flagged so that it still falls under the old policy?
- pyre 17y agoPrivacy Policy Changes OpenDNS may change its Privacy Policy from time to time, and in OpenDNS' sole discretion. OpenDNS encourages visitors to frequently check this page for any changes to its Privacy Policy. If changes are made, notice will be given in the OpenDNS sites and the OpenDNS blog at http://blog.opendns.com/ and we *may* send an email to registered using to notify them of the change. Your continued use of our sites and services after any change in this Privacy Policy will constitute your acceptance of such change. So you may have a notice pushed out to you, but you may not. If you use OpenDNS to make the DNS request to to view their blog to read the new privacy policy, technically you have already made use of their service under the new terms. Oops. Edit: emphasis in the quote was mine
- tptacek 17y agoThe funny part about this claim is that 90+% of Internet users use DNS solely to get to Google. It's really a choice between having one big company tracking your habits, or two, one of which is small, under intense pressure, and hungry.
- marltod 17y agoThat isn't how DNS works. It is true that 90% of users go directly to google, but once there they click on Search results, news results, etc... The browser takes the link and the OS does a DNS lookup to get the ip address of the server hosting that url. Then the browser connects to that server, google is no longer in the picture.
- dmnd 17y agoThe point was that, for most users, Google is an abstraction over URLs, just like DNS is an abstraction over IP addresses.
- Kadin 17y agoExactly. A lot of people don't remember domain names anymore, they remember the words they need to type into Google in order to bring that site up as the top link. E.g., if they want to get to Dell's website, rather than typing "dell.com" into the URL field, they type "dell" or "dell computer" into the search box and then click on the first result.
- Retric 17y agoOddly enough this relates to all the domain squatters out there. If you misstype something into the search bar you don't know what you get, but by clicking on the first link in Google you are taken the to the "reputable" site. So a reputable DNS service that did this automatically would be a direct threat to Google.
- tptacek 17y ago
- jeff18 17y agoSadly, it's just FUD, and it appears to be spreading.
- Kadin 17y agoI'm not sure how much of a concern that is for most users, who use Google to get to all the content on the Internet anyway. Having DNS records wouldn't buy Google much that they don't already have from search queries and results. It's getting to be a very rare (non-technical) user who actually types URLs directly into their browser; most people go through Google, even to get to sites where the domain name and site name are exactly the same. They're hitting Google for every single site they visit already.
- eli 17y agoI honestly don't think they would be that evil (and the privacy policy as currently stated would forbid that), but they can collect aggregate data and infer what sites are popular at what times and from what geographic/network locations. That's useful data. I bet you could use it to create web stats that are at least as good as Alexa (admittedly a low bar).
- earl 17y agoUm, they already have Google Analytics and their search toolbar. I rather doubt there is much they don't see.
- mtarnovan 17y agoLots of FUD, not so much useful stuff.
- Sidnicious 17y agoAgreed. Responding to competition by trying to scare your users away from the competitor isn't healthy.
- Confusion 17y agoIt's a tactic politicians have successfully used for ages. If it works, you can't blame a company for doing it. They're not in it for the ethics, but for the money.
- dschobel 17y agoAgreed. The first point is the only legitimate technical point. Everything else is just vague fear mongering about how google might misuse their dominant position and frankly DNS doesn't scare me any more than Google owning my email, documents and search history. Either way, OpenDNS is awesome and I'm excited to see how they'll proceed fighting Google's entry (on technical merit).
- bumblebird 17y agoIt seems more worried/scared than anything to me. If I was openDNS I would be worried also.
- polynomial 17y agoPutting aside Dave's obvious bias and the question of ads, frankly, I'm shocked he misses the obvious: Google DNS is intended to work with Chrome's DNS prefetch, which is arguably the key technique that makes Chrome so fast.
- tptacek 17y agoThird, Google claims that this service is better because it has no ads or redirection. But you have to remember they are also the largest advertising and redirection company on the Internet. To think that Google’s DNS service is for the benefit of the Internet would be naive. In other words: Google's DNS service has no ads or redirections. Ours does. But that doesn't make our service worse, because Google is an ad company.
- davidu 17y agoThey just do it at a different layer. They do it in the toolbar or chrome. It's no different, plus users can turn it off if they want with us. It's all in users hands.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]
- jeff18 17y ago"It's no different" Actually, it is. Google's DNS has no ads. Yours, by default, does. Also, FYI, Chrome and the Google toolbar have no ads. It sounds like you have your head in the sand, or are deliberately spreading FUD. I hope it's the former.
- Retric 17y agoIt just occurred to me that by using DNS without any filters Google is going to take people to domain squatters when someone mistypes a domain name. To get around this users are going to continue to type the domain (or company name) into Google and click on the first link and some of them will click on the advertising link. An "improved" form of DNS is a direct threat to Google's profit.
- tptacek 17y agoThat "improved" form of DNS breaks the DNS. Read what the IAB wrote about it. Think about what it does to things like email. It's just a bad, bad idea.
- sanj 17y ago* To think that Google’s DNS service is for the benefit of the Internet would be naive. * Google believe that making the internet better benefits them. They largely don't feel they need to monetize every niche there.
- agnokapathetic 17y agoTo think that Google’s DNS service is for the benefit of the Internet would be naive. I'm not so sure, it is starting to seem like Google has worked out essentially that Revenue = User-Time on Internet. The Chrome project is one example, a better faster internet is in Google's best interest.
- rms 17y ago>Revenue = User-Time on Internet Yes, I was told that explicitly at a presentation by Google recently. Anything that makes the internet better or makes people use it more makes Google more money.
- roc 17y agoAnd, like many of their other projects, they seem to be content to throw their hat in the ring just to keep everyone else honest. Broken DNS is a threat. But they don't need to answer all DNS requests to protect against it. They just need a non-broken service as a credible threat to keep the other providers from sliding in that direction.
- raphar 17y agoA couple of questions: Hasn't google tried to acquire OpenDns? It's a no brainer! Has been any contact between the two companies? The scenario of google (or any company) controling internet traffic is not a nice one :(
- evgen 17y agoWhy bother trying to acquire them when there is nothing technically difficult about what opendns is doing and when google has more resources and technical expertise to bring to bear on the problem? What exactly would you expect opendns to bring to the table other than a trademark and a somewhat controversial reputation? To be honest I am somewhat surprised that opendns has lasted as long as they have, but I expected the attack to come from the akamai/cdn direction rather than directly from google.
- davidw 17y agoI think what makes me nervous about it is that I can't even control my own sites any more if I use Google's DNS, and get the "mysterious Google lockout with no recourse".
- theBobMcCormick 17y agoThat makes no sense at all. How would using Google DNS remove your control of your own domain? Google DNS is just a resolver, it's not an authoritative DNS. If you were "locked out" for some reason you could just go back to using your ISP dns servers. Where's the problem?
- davidw 17y agoErr... sorry - let's chalk that up to flu leftovers in my head. I was thinking of a Google DNS service for one's own domains ala EveryDNS.
- doosra 17y agoThe fine-grained control is a plus for openDNS. Second, from the stories that seem to pop up, google's achilles heel is it's customer service. OpenDNS might be able to do better.
- pyre 17y agoUsing their DNS server shouldn't require much user input. Nonetheless, most people use their ISP's DNS servers, and let me tell you that Comcast support will always tell you that your computer is at fault if there is a DNS issue. Google is entering a domain where poor customer service is the norm. Edit: just realized the pun... totally unintended, but funny to see an 'Easter Egg' of sorts hidden from you in your own post.
- dfranke 17y agoI don't want "Dashboard controls to manage your experience the way you want for you, your family or your organization". I just want a DNS server that obeys the goddamn protocol.
- Steve0 17y agoThat's your choice of course. If you work in a small school it's easy to block unsuitable sites this way.Another alternative would be the level 3 dns servers, easy to remember, pretty fast and no alteration of records.
- samaparicio 17y agoTake the FUD point of view if you want. I don't see it. When a giant enters your market, this is a great way to react. No dismissal of their impact, validation that you created a market, desire to keep on competing, and ultimately, positioning positioning positioning of your competitive differentiators... I applaud David for his post and I think we can all learn.
- wglb 17y agoWell, First, it’s not the same as OpenDNS. When you use Google DNS, you are getting the experience they prescribe.--turns out they did not prescribe that, the standards perscribe that. OpenDNS breaks the protocol. Second, it means that Google realizes that DNS is a critical piece of our Internet’s infrastructure and that it’s of strategic importance to help people safely and reliably navigate the Internet. -- This is not very astonishing, as it is pretty much the definition of what DNS is. Third, Google claims that this service is better because it has no ads or redirection. -- And that is because ads and redirection are nonstandard, broken behavior. Fourth, it means that Google is bringing awareness to a wide audience that there is a choice when it comes to DNS and that users don’t have to settle for what their ISP provides. -- And they don't have to settle for broken behavior that other services provide. Fifth, it’s not clear that Internet users really want Google to keep control over so much more of their Internet experience than they do already -- If more control means correct behavior, then they might think so.
- deleted 17y ago[deleted]