Their opinion is that it's a way for people to get around corporate firewalls. Kinda blind to the idea that if a browser can implement DNS over HTTPS then anything can.
Especially since there's some of ways that Mozilla have implemented for a local area DNS server to override its settings.
There's also another camp, if you remember the "internet villain of the year" award that Mozilla got for DNS over HTTPS from an ISP industry group.
Of course their argument was parental controls being made ineffective.
But of course it's transparent that this was a gambit to change public opinion so they can keep collecting browsing data to sell.
Interesting to note they went after Mozilla not Google who are also implementing it.
But really the messed up thing is that this improves privacy for the vast majority of users. Especially those people around the world where searching the wrong thing up online can lead to imprisonment or worse.
This kind of thing is a privacy improvement for millions.
And I find it shocking that people in Business IT care more about managing their corporate devices than the good of the majority of internet users.
The job blocking domains should be the job of a firewall. Of course this becomes more complex. But any application can implement DNS over HTTPS.
Malware could even just get a list of IPs from another IP.
An application can even just hard code IPs rather than using DNS and then they're in the same position.
DNS-based blocking is not perfect, but is currently still very powerful for things like adblocking.
You're basically saying that Firefox is now behaving like malware, which I agree with...
Windows 10's telemetry is also another piece of software which has started to become hostile in this manner, hardcoding IPs and such.
Mozilla has recently begun offering an integrated VPN with Firefox, though unlike DoH that has a monthly subscription fee (hell, I don't blame them for wanting to diversify their revenue). The partner in that case is Mullvad.
> You're basically saying that Firefox is now behaving like malware
This is hyperbole. End users should look out for their own best interests by using any means necessary, which includes hiding as much as they can from the network. If the network doesn't like that, then it has the choice not to allow that user to attach a device to the network.
I was a happy pihole user. I could choose to allow DNS lookups, and blacklist using OpenDNS. If I install Firefox at home, then I can't block problematic sites; and Cloudflare will use this to sell the idea to advertiser for TVs and such, so it looks like Google/Cloudflare just used Firefox to obviate ad blocking.
DoH is not meant for us, it is meant for the average people who have no tech background. Just because it will cost us a few minutes to configure, we shouldn't deny the overall benefit it will bring to most.
Thats not the problem. If more application folow Firefox, and do DNS on their own, corporate applications and sites will stop working, and IT will get the blame.
Now that it's just firefox, ok, but if other app will follow the lead, we will constantly have to play whack a mole, why someone doesn't resolve correctly.
How do I debug problems ?
Is there a tool (something like dig), i can use to see, how will Firefox resolve a domain ?
Where i work we don't block anything on our firewall, but we have plenty of services only exposed on internal DNS. Not to mention, we have to a lot of times replicate environment that is similar to clients, so I often create zones, where people can VPN in, and have similar DNS resolution as the target. Each app doing its own DNS will make that harder.
> Especially those people around the world where searching the wrong thing up online can lead to imprisonment or worse
That would be true, if Mozilla rolled this out worldwide, but its US only.
Also right now there are bazillion ISP with bazillion DNS servers.
There are very few DOH DNS providers that Mozilla endorses, so if majority of "privacy" conscious people will start using them, it will become that more valuable for various bad actors to compromise them. Right now there are so many ISP's with their own DNS's that even if all of them were selling the data, just finding them all and buying their data would be huge task.
This is another centralization of previously decentralized service. (like it happened with email)
Honestly I think that in the long run, this will be worse for privacy that we have now.
They can block the canary domain[1].
> Of course their argument was parental controls being made ineffective.
DoH is disabled on Windows and macOS if parental controls are enabled[1].
[1] https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/configuring-networks-di...
Now we are headed to a future where each software vendor decides how to make DNS queries. I can predict that all of them will apply their own custom heuristics to detect things like split-horizon.
That ship had already sailed. You also have to run your own DNS, allow DNS egress only from your own DNS, and DNAT the rest back to yours in order to un-break all the things with hard-coded resolvers.
Why don't they ask DHCP for a nice stratum 1 server instead, I don't know, maybe someone here does?
It started with PCI compliance. Next up was Corporate IT making sure idiots weren't signing up for Dropbox with their LAN password. Schools: Well, they always used proxies with no expectation of privacy whatsoever so traffic inspection was nothing new.
In 5 years TLS-recryption -- whether through software or a hardware middlebox -- will be as ubiquitous as a NAT firewall is now. The only question is if the keys will be in the hands of the consumer or in escrow with Big Gov.
The idea that anyone in their right mind would allow uninspectable traffic to egress their network is beyond ridiculous. I'm glad that DoH is making people realize that.
Browsers shouldn't implement DNS theirself, and should use operating system APIs to do all the DNS queries. That is how networks work, and doing that differently creates problems (imagine if every program has its implementation of DNS over HTTPS, you have to configure correctly the DNS server in each of them, and good luck debugging it when one implementation is broken...)
As a technical motivation, HTTPS in an high level protocol, and using it for DNS is kind an overhead. We already have DNS over TLS that is a standadized protocol, that can be used, and that the operating systems are starting to implement.
I use DNS over TLS in my local network, but rather than having configured all the computers to use it I have configured a local DNS server that encrypts the requests, for every host in the network, and also filters trackers and ad servers. Thus I don't want Firefox to mess aroung with my local network configuration that is fine.
And second, as an IT admin, I’m annoyed web browsers keep trying to develop new ways to bypass my network security.
Yes, that includes oppressive governments too... but I hardly think that even more centralisation is the solution.
The old security vs freedom quote is surprisingly relevant in so many situations today.
There are a few dozens of DoH services out there [1] and nothing prevents anybody else from running their own.
DNS is the most openly insecure aspect of the entire internet. It’s wide open.
That's an intentional design feature. You're attempting to intercept traffic, and any mechanism you could use to do so "transparently" could be used by any hostile network to do so.
You can still intercept traffic from cooperating devices if you want, just not transparently. That's a feature, not a bug, and the Internet will be better for it.
2) to implement this canary, you have to break DNSSEC on entire .net root domain. Great.
With normal DNS anyone in the request chain can see a stream of DNS requests but there is no context. By the time the request is one or two hops from you it will be interwoven with tens of thousands of other requests making it impossible to know which one came from who.
With DOH the DNS provider will have a unique identifier to correlate requests back to a specific system/user. Google offers one of the most used DNS services, with DOH they will be able to track all DNS requests you make even if you turn on a VPN.
It added yet another thing I have to implement, test and maintain through whatever changes they decide to make.
Nothing like adding extra work for every enterprise IT team to make new friends.
There are also some massive security issues with making all https traffic blind that making only the data blind didn't create - like the ability to blackhole known unsafe domains as they appear.
And DoH will enable every device you own to continue spying on you for the benefit of corporations.
DNS is the last bastion of preventing devices I can't sufficiently control from spying on me. I use DNS filtering to block their tracking domains. I use my firewall to prevent devices from accessing DNS resolvers I don't control.
DoH takes those options away from me. Ridiculously, in the name of privacy. Ha!
Unfortunately, the battle was lost the moment someone created a DoH implementation. It hardly matters what the browsers do. All the other things I don't want to have DoH will eventually implement it. And they won't respect use-application-dns.net or whatever other frameworks Mozilla comes up with for controlling DoH at the network level.
(Also, does anyone really believe that governments, ISPs, and public DNS resolvers aren't going to disable DoH with use-application-dns.net? I'm sure whomever came up with DoH in the first place had great intentions but the end result is a disaster that will cause more harm than benefit)
If you are worried about traffic in the browser you can not enable it, it you are worried about anything else then VPNs were already a thing since some time ago.
How do I stop that when my ability to control what happens on my own network has been been reduced to Can access the Internet over 443, or not?
If you are talking about Firefox itself, then disable it.
I sympathize with wanting more control, but I do not understand how DoH changes things in a household settings.
(I am assuming your is not a corporate point of view, in that case I agree that DoH might cause significant headaches)
Imagine you run a PiHole or use a service like OpenDNS. It doesn't matter what you've chosen to use or block, what matters is that you've made a choice to utilize DNS filtering for certain things.
You soon discover that some apps and devices don't respect your DNS decisions. They make money or derive other value through communications that are blocked by certain DNS-based filters, so they query 8.8.8.8 or some other DNS directly. You figure out how to make them respect your choice, through a combination of restricting DNS egress and DNAT at the router, and all is well again.
Mozilla and Chrome come along with DoH. That's alright. You can configure them not to. There's the canary domain, so you don't even need to configure browsers manually, tho I expect the canary will eventually go away -- it is destined to be "abused" by every entity in a position to get away with it.
What's going to come next is real the problem: Every entity which can benefit from being able to bypass DNS filters is going to move to DoH. It's in their best interests to do so. They don't need to respect the canary. You won't even be able to tell what they're doing because everything is encrypted with TLS and have pinned their certificates.
App will do it. Embedded devices will do it. Actual malware will do it.
This outcome is inevitable and that is my objection to the mere existence of DoH.
I understand why people do not want this and want control over their own network, I find that a commendable goal. I do not understand how DoH specifically introduces anything new since you could already get DNS data from HTTPS API
Also, turns out that malware has already jumped on the DoH bandwagon.
It has been part of the network stack, with a clear hierarchy in how it is governed:
- network operator - network default
- operating system - application default
- end-user override - when the defaults doesn't work
When something has not worked, you could reliably assume this was the stack used. And you could rely on it being used consistently across all applications.
Needed to deploy internal applications? Great: Just override the (local, internal) DNS. Need to access servers or machines on internal servers? Use DNS!
Now if you make some random applications and decide to flat out ignore the established stack and just ask the internet about DNS...
You're effectively breaking the network and the conventions which has been established to build them.
Ofcourse people are going to hate you. That's a given.
To my mind, the lack of privacy of classic DNS does indeed count as the the defaults failing to work. Yes, it would be more ideal to solve this at the OS level, but until OS vendors start providing solutions I don't begrudge applications that care about privacy for taking matters into their own hands.
2) They are the singular (maybe there's one other now heh) resolver operator whereas with DNS anyone (even you) could (and did) run a recursive resolver.
3) I don't think anyone cares so much about this but http is probably the wrong protocol. The DNS protocol was pretty elegant in its efficiency and simplicity (IMO.) Yeah the compression was slightly complex (it's really not) but I've written clients without anything other than a socket library. HTTP on the other hand can do all kinds of complex things and has plenty of room for weirdness and tracking and unintuitive behavior that just isn't necessary for resolving names.
TL;DR: DoH is an unimaginative hack that has a lot of problems from a technical perspective but the social problems are much worse.
As for 2), it's not hard to run a DoH server yourself. In fact, it's much safer because it doesn't allow for amplification attacks like traditional DNS. The same goes for DNS over TLS (over TCP).
I agree with you on your third point though. I'd much rather have seen DNS over TLS being built into Firefox, especially as most DoH providers built into Firefox also provide DoT. DoT is easier to set up as well because you don't need any specific DNS server software (just have an nginx proxy the TCP connection to your existing DNS, it's about 10 lines of config).
I discovered that Android's "private DNS" functionality uses DoT. I feared they'd use DoH but luckily I was proven wrong.
And I say the possibility because I'm not American so that's not enabled here (yet). But I trust my ISP and my government much more than I trust Cloudflare (zero) and I will be very disappointed (even more than I already am) at Mozilla if they enable it in the rest of the world.
DNS is the primary way governments control and spy on web access.