Unfortunately the monkey’s paw would curl here and using DNS other than that provided by your ISP would become illegal.
(I know there’s a difference between your devices using their network to access the internet and your “purchased” (licensed software running on) your device using your network to access the internet - but the monkey doesn’t care)
RFC 2132 says DHCP option 6 provides “a list of Domain Name System name servers available to the client”. That’s a MAY use, not a MUST use. You are welcome to block DNS requests to outside servers if you prefer.
RFCs are subordinate to laws. If I, the device and network owner, want my device to use the DNS I set and the device does differently, I want the rogue corp prosecuted and IDGAF what some goddamn RFC says!
I understand perfectly well how tech works. I also understand how property rights work – or at least, how they’re supposed to work.
The real question is, why does a person asserting their right not to be abused by corporations apparently offend your sensibilities so much that you have to tell bullshit lies in some desperate, pathetic attempt to smear me?
No, because the law cares about intent, not technical details. Having my property do DNS over HTTPS because that’s what I, the owner, wanted is fine; having my property do DNS over HTTPS because that’s what some non-owner entity wanted against my will as the owner is not.
They do, but thankfully with pfSense you can do DNS overrides with firewall rules to force all network devices to use local DNS, blocking everything else.
You have the destination IP to work with, thats it. Otherwise it just looks like any other HTTPS traffic.
I guess if you uplpaded your own root CA cert tgen you could man-in-the-middle for deeper packet inspection.
Or, i guess, try using eMudhra’s compromised private keys and hope the clients havent been updated yet
Right, I guess as more DoH servers become available, it’ll be harder to track, but you could intercept and blackhole any HTTPS traffic to one.one.one.one and other popular servers to have them fallback.
one.one.one.one isnt an http/ request, its a dns lookup.
If it was an http/s request to 1.1.1.1 then it could be blocked. Also, super cheap/easy to proxy
I’m surprised it didn’t just have google’s DNS hardcoded to bypass your pihole.
That ought to be illegal.
(No, seriously: disobeying DNS the owner set by DHCP ought to count as “exceeding authorized access” under the CFAA.)
Unfortunately the monkey’s paw would curl here and using DNS other than that provided by your ISP would become illegal.
(I know there’s a difference between your devices using their network to access the internet and your “purchased” (licensed software running on) your device using your network to access the internet - but the monkey doesn’t care)
RFC 2132 says DHCP option 6 provides “a list of Domain Name System name servers available to the client”. That’s a MAY use, not a MUST use. You are welcome to block DNS requests to outside servers if you prefer.
RFCs are subordinate to laws. If I, the device and network owner, want my device to use the DNS I set and the device does differently, I want the rogue corp prosecuted and IDGAF what some goddamn RFC says!
I don’t think you’d be able to find a court receptive to that argument.
Every court that disagrees is tyrannical and needs to be fucking abolished.
All of that because you don’t understand how tech works?
I understand perfectly well how tech works. I also understand how property rights work – or at least, how they’re supposed to work.
The real question is, why does a person asserting their right not to be abused by corporations apparently offend your sensibilities so much that you have to tell bullshit lies in some desperate, pathetic attempt to smear me?
No, tell me how you really feel!
Counter point on that, that might affect the legality of DNS over HTTPS
No, because the law cares about intent, not technical details. Having my property do DNS over HTTPS because that’s what I, the owner, wanted is fine; having my property do DNS over HTTPS because that’s what some non-owner entity wanted against my will as the owner is not.
Rather: they are free to do protocol negotiation with the DNS server I supply. If it speaks DoH, go for it.
Chromecasts do that. I had to intercept port 53 on the router to fix it.
DNS over ssl.
They do, but thankfully with pfSense you can do DNS overrides with firewall rules to force all network devices to use local DNS, blocking everything else.
https://dominetec.com.br/en/redirect-all-dns-requests-to-pfsense-router
Neat! Trying this in a few minutes. Be lovely having everything go through my local Pihole VM.
next move is theirs… knight to queen’s dns-over-https
There are several DoH IP lists on github. Find one that is staying updated and use it as an alias to block them all
That’ll get blocked too.
How?
Carefully.
While nuking all https?
I redirect all out going dns requests to my self hosted DNS server.
Only one I can’t block is DoH. DoT is easily blocked and my firewall picks up on it.
Could you block DoH entirely on the network level and cause it to fallback? I guess you’d have to have a list of common DoH IP addresses to block.
You have the destination IP to work with, thats it. Otherwise it just looks like any other HTTPS traffic.
I guess if you uplpaded your own root CA cert tgen you could man-in-the-middle for deeper packet inspection.
Or, i guess, try using eMudhra’s compromised private keys and hope the clients havent been updated yet
Right, I guess as more DoH servers become available, it’ll be harder to track, but you could intercept and blackhole any HTTPS traffic to
one.one.one.oneand other popular servers to have them fallback.Yeh, exactly. “You have the ip to work with”
one.one.one.oneisnt an http/ request, its a dns lookup.If it was an http/s request to
1.1.1.1then it could be blocked. Also, super cheap/easy to proxy