Advice Request What DNS client to use?

Please provide comments and solutions that are helpful to the author of this topic.
Yes, it is currently at version 2.0.42, you can use an updated DNSCrypt Proxy 2.0.45, but with no GUI unfortunately, CMD setup might be challenging.
I was easily able to extract DNSCrypt Proxy 2.0.45 over version 2.0.42 in C:\Program Files\bitbeans\Simple DNSCrypt x64\dnscrypt-proxy

Its seems to be working just fine. WIll need to test it further but it seems stable so far.
dns.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
YogaDNS with NextDNS.
This is the sweet spot for me, as well. I had a whale of a time recently, though, with NextDNS not recognizing Microsoft services, i.e., network connection (did not affect actually connecting to the internet), weather, MS store, etc. In case anyone else has the problem I resolved it by adding www.msftconnecttest.com and dns.msftncsi.com to my NextDNS allow list. So far it's still purring right along.
 
That's how DNS works and with every DNS service and program possible ;)
You can do that also directly in Windows

Correct. But not securely (yet). That function is in the testing ring. I wasn't sure what constituted a client because Adguard is not like YogaDNS, DNScrypt, nebulo, etc.
 
What did you mean? DNS changes on OS level need admin rights, so it is secure.

Using clients for DNS is insecure, increase attack surface and complexity/ instability.
I mean that Windows does not yet allow for DoH or LoT at the OS level, but it will soon. It has nothing it do with admin rights, and everything to do with encryption.
 
I mean that Windows does not yet allow for DoH or LoT at the OS level, but it will soon. It has nothing it do with admin rights, and everything to do with encryption.
Adding upcoming DoH in Windows need admin rights too.

Still don't understand what you mean with secure.
Encrypted DNS isn't for security.
 
Adding upcoming DoH in Windows need admin rights too.

Still don't understand what you mean with secure.
Encrypted DNS isn't for security.
Sure it it. Any time something is encrypted you add security. So, I don't get your argument that encrypted DNS isn't for security when that is literally the point of encryption. Now, one can make the argument that encrypted DNS isn't needed, but that comes down to preference. Again, I'm talking about encrypted DNS, so I don't understand your fascination with local privilegesj. That's apples and oranges. One has nothing to do with the other.
 
Sure it it. Any time something is encrypted you add security. So, I don't get your argument that encrypted DNS isn't for security when that is literally the point of encryption. Now, one can make the argument that encrypted DNS isn't needed, but that comes down to preference. Again, I'm talking about encrypted DNS, so I don't understand your fascination with local privilegesj. That's apples and oranges. One has nothing to do with the other.


Encrypted DNS is all about privacy than security. You can still easily get infected by malwares despite sitting on an encrypted DNS configuration.
 
Encrypted DNS is all about privacy than security. You can still easily get infected by malwares despite sitting on an encrypted DNS configuration.
DoH is, yes. DoT is not. As a whole, encryption is about security.
 

You may also like...