zlacker

> You can't control it as a network administrator

You can't control it as a malicious censor who's trying to control what Web sites other people's computers can access just because they're on your Wi-Fi. You can absolutely control it on computers that are actually yours.

>>joseph+(OP)
If a malicious app on your system is using DoH, how can you control it? This is what GP was complaining about.

Of course, this is not the fault of DoH providers themselves - at worst, they have just made it easier to perform this.

>>tsimio+VD
Because if it's your system, you can remove the malicious app from it.

And it's a good thing that DoH is easy, because it helps protect vulnerable people from censorship and surveillance.

>>joseph+(OP)
For now. I would point out that the browser with the largest market share by a considerable margin is created and developed by a company that makes most of its money by selling ads, and that choosing your own DNS server with the capability of blocking those ads is a direct threat to that revenue model.

They will tell you it is to defeat censorship though and to improve network resilience, because they are deeply committed to having the image of being a champion of internet freedom.

>>denkmo+K04
They don't need DoH to stop you from being able to block ads at the network level. For a while, a lot of sites have been proxying their ads through their own domains to do that.

And besides, every browser that supports DoH also lets you pick what server to use, and adblocking DoH servers exist.