It seems like you're saying you think software shouldn't use DoH because if you disable it, malware might ignore you. That just doesn't make sense - malware *is* software - it can use DoH today whether other software does or not.
-
-
Replying to @taviso
imagine if DoH were never an RFC and wasn't deployed by the top unblockable web search provider. In that world, malware would not be able to use DoH without being obvious and being caught. I'm not saying we shouldn't *use* DoH. I'm saying we shouldn't even *invent* it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @daoist
Isn't that just saying "Pretty please only use these protocols?", it's just a minor variation of what you were making fun of. Malware authors use their own protocols all the time? https://attack.mitre.org/techniques/T1094/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
In general, I reject the argument that we shouldn't invent anything that malware might benefit from. Malware can and does abuse cryptography, email, irc, twitter, anything. The benefit to society of those things is too great to not invent them.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @taviso
we disagree on the benefit to society. DoH promises that one's queries won't be spied upon. Instead it just aggregates the spying into the hands of larger entities who can then create a more full picture of my activity. to me that's *worse* than plaintext DNS.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @daoist
DNS snooping is a real problem, invasive ISPs and wifi networks are real scenarios for people. You'll be able to disable it on your endpoints if you think it's worse than plaintext DNS (?), but we should do something for the users affected. Not everyone is as lucky as you.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
-
Replying to @daoist
The people doing the snooping are *heavily* invested in plaintext DNS, and are pushing back very hard against DoH, with pretty dubious arguments. Some of them say, "You've got us all wrong, we love DNS privacy, please just use DoT instead!"
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The problem is, it's very easy to force users to downgrade from DoT to plaintext. A cynic might suspect they know that fact, and that's why they support it. It is very hard to downgrade DoH to plaintext unless you own the endpoint, or have permission from the user.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @taviso
Would a non-downgradable DoT fulfill the use cases for DoH?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
A non-downgradable DoT exists, it's called DoH 
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.