News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Pi-hole 5.0 by Nextgrid on Monday May 11, 2020 @05:01AM (#23140173)
They could've at least intercepted the requests and applied their blacklist while leaving unblacklisted requests pass through as-is (so you can still use a custom server for the non-banned domains). Not saying I'm in favour of these shenanigans at all but at least if you are forced to do it then better do it with the minimum level of interference possible.
Re:Pi-hole 5.0 by Kliment on Monday May 11, 2020 @05:46AM (#23140409)
Then you can have your client lookup blacklistedsite.com.yourdomain.com and have yourdomain.com return the record of blacklistedsite.com to bypass filtering.
Re:Pi-hole 5.0 by Nextgrid on Monday May 11, 2020 @05:49AM (#23140424)
Just like you could register your own domain and return the record of a blacklisted website?
Re:Pi-hole 5.0 by Kliment on Monday May 11, 2020 @08:12AM (#23141247)
Of course, but presumably the censoring dns server would never return a censored ip, regardless of domain. Whereas if you were to passthrough all non-blacklisted queries you wouldn't be able to block that, which is why no censor would ever implement it that way.
Re:Pi-hole 5.0 by Firehawke on Monday May 11, 2020 @04:31PM (#23146675)
Which is why you'd end up implementing tunneling for your DNS requests like cloudflared provides.