Archived
Document the criteria for DNS servers #1111
1 Participants
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: privacyguides/privacytools.io#1111
Reference in New Issue
Block a user
Description
Resolves: #1109
Preview
https://github.com/Mikaela/privacytools.io/issues/new/choose
Deploy preview for privacytools-io ready!
Built with commit
9e007f11behttps://deploy-preview-1111--privacytools-io.netlify.com
Ok, I was missing a lot when getting distracted
Todo: read privacy policies of "some" logging (#1097)
Todo: small explanation or a link how to test it?
Todo: testing instruction in case the provider doesn't advertise this.
@@ -0,0 +17,4 @@**Source:** <!-- link to the source code, preferred, but optional -->**Type:** <!-- Non-profit, commercial, hobby project? -->**Website:**Todo: Server location? Privacy policy? Type? Protocols? Filtering?
Does this look OK, or am I putting too many details, or too little details? Is it cluttered, am I saying too much by telling the issue reporter to feel free to overwrite comments?
@nitrohorse Could we actually boost DNSSEC into a required feature as everyone on #1097 appears to support it?
Yeah, I think so 👍🏼
I guess this is ready for review
Could we make this also a checkbox?
Sure, done, I was thinking of making it obvious that all features are checked, but I guess this is nice for comparsion
Do we mean “Android 9+?”
I tried to say newer than 9, but I can change it to that too if you wish
I guess consistency
This LGTM 👍🏼
Ah gotcha, okay, no worries; you can leave it 👌🏼
@@ -0,0 +23,4 @@<!-- Why should we list your suggestion? Anything else, that you wish us to know? -->### Required features:Why not add
Prioritize DNS with TOR/I2P When Available?Also, I think P2P DNS Support is a must:
Consider adding
Must Support P2P DNS (i.e NameCoin)@@ -0,0 +23,4 @@<!-- Why should we list your suggestion? Anything else, that you wish us to know? -->### Required features:Censorship may also be a concern, have you considered adding
Net Neutralto the list?@@ -0,0 +23,4 @@<!-- Why should we list your suggestion? Anything else, that you wish us to know? -->### Required features:basically there are three conflicting meanins for the word "DNS with Tor" and we aren't aware of any resolvers that support I2P.
How widely used are they, how is the encryption and how is it P2P if everyone is just using a DNS server that happens to resolve it?
How do you define censorship or Net Neutral as opposed to filtering which is already on the list?
Small suggestion:
@@ -0,0 +23,4 @@<!-- Why should we list your suggestion? Anything else, that you wish us to know? -->### Required features:Hmm how would AdGuard and Quad9 for instance be classified then as under this criteria since they filter ads/trackers/malware? I think filtering (when expected) is useful for a subset of PTIO's users' threat models.
Done
Seems alright to me.
LGTM