Advice Request DoH, DoT, DNSCrypt or DoQ?

Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.

DoH, DoT, DNSCrypt or DoQ?

  • DNS-over-HTTPS

    Votes: 8 47.1%
  • DNS-over-TLS

    Votes: 5 29.4%
  • DNSCrypt

    Votes: 1 5.9%
  • DNS-over-QUIC

    Votes: 3 17.6%

  • Total voters
    17
If I could choose, I would in this order (UDP over TCP always).

1. DNS-over-QUIC
2. DNSCrypt
3. DNS-over-TLS
4. DNS-over-HTTPS

DoH is the worst possible option, unfortunately, it is the only thing, that browsers and the next Windows 10 support. It is still better than the default DNS, but ... . :cautious:
 
If I could choose, I would in this order (UDP over TCP always).

1. DNS-over-QUIC
2. DNSCrypt
3. DNS-over-TLS
4. DNS-over-HTTPS

DoH is the worst possible option, unfortunately, it is the only thing, that browsers and the next Windows 10 support. It is still better than the default DNS, but ... . :cautious:
UDP over TCP because it's faster?
 
If I could choose, I would in this order (UDP over TCP always).

1. DNS-over-QUIC
2. DNSCrypt
3. DNS-over-TLS
4. DNS-over-HTTPS

DoH is the worst possible option, unfortunately, it is the only thing, that browsers and the next Windows 10 support. It is still better than the default DNS, but ... . :cautious:
DNSCrypt has quit and replaced by DoT

 
DNSCrypt has quit and replaced by DoT

Isn't it still integrated in Yandex Browser?
 
therefore DNS requests must be hidden in HTTPS traffic
Encrypted DNS requests are all private, regardless of which option you choose. ISP will still see, that you are making requests to the particular DNS service, just via https, but ISP will not be able to tell, what you are requesting. DoH is just harder to block, but not impossible, if they wanted to. Still, without VPN, ISP will know to what IPs you have connected, most likely webpages as well. So much for privacy. The main advantage of encrypted DNS is, that they are better protected and can not be easily tampered with, DNSEC can be hijacked.

 

Attachments

  • capture_01102021_164726.jpg
    capture_01102021_164726.jpg
    366.5 KB · Views: 382