Privacy

31981 readers

384 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

Chat rooms

[Matrix/Element]Dead
Discord

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Quad9 censoring DNS requests? (lemmy.world)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

39 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I noticed that Quad 9 is not able to respond to the spy.pet query:

$ dig spy.pet @9.9.9.9 +short
;; communications error to 9.9.9.9#53: timed out

But Cloudflare DNS is able to do it:

$ dig spy.pet @1.1.1.1 +short
104.26.0.165
104.26.1.165
172.67.74.73

And to be sure, I checked another domain with the same TLD to rule out the option that Quad9 is unable to handle the .pet TLD, but I received a correct answer...

$ dig hello.pet @9.9.9.9 +short
3.64.163.50

Does Quad9 censor DNS queries?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It would literally be easier to add that capability to your own custom DNS server software. After all it is literally an "if query.name in blocklist then drop connection". Even replacing results would be simple as long as DNSSEC is not involved. You wouldn't have to add it though since all major DNS servers already include it because it is so simple and has legitimate uses, such as blocking malware control server names or ad blocking.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yes, it is likely that most providers running custom generic or custom stacks already have the functionally built in and also yes, adding an "if" is easy but then once you’ve thousands of servers running the same piece of software across the globe deploying updates and features becomes way slower and way harder. You've to consider tests, regressions, a way to properly store and sincronize the blocklists across nodes etc...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

How much simpler can I make this...

You have a primary 'master' server in the pool.

Replica/cache servers periodically ask the master for any updates.

Master gives a new update, which is a sinkhole for a marked malicious domain.

Replica/cache server now resolves malicious domain to the sinkhole address.

This is not a 'feature' you have to implement, it's a basic function of running a redundant DNS system.