NextDNS logging is opt-out, not opt-in as stated on PG's DNS Resolvers recommendations page

[dngray (Daniel Gray)]

@ignoramous

ODoH and DNSCrypt v3 build it into the protocol. So yes, providers that bill for anonymity exist.

Neither of which are implemented in any OS resolver or browser to my knowledge. RFC9230 was marked as experimental in June 2022. DNSCrypt v3 is still a draft in early stages.

@ignoramous

For any org that claims “GDPR compliance” must be listing down these subprocessors, no?

Apparently not , the provider just needs to retain a list of them. Though on this I am no GDPR expert. It also seems it depends on the complexity of the product. @ph00lt0 would be able to give a better answer I am sure.

Damn reddit sucks, blocking all VPNs now. archive.org and archive.today links.

@ignoramous

@dngray

That being said we are attempting to encourage NextDNS to provide a little more detail in that regard.

The words you use: “encourage” “little more detail” stand in stark contrast to how I’ve seen PrivacyGuides operate when making other recommendations. I digress.

I sent them an email and made the suggestion. There isn’t much more I can do.

@ignoramous

Is that why you keep insulting me so people wouldn’t? That explains a lot. /s

Calm down i haven’t insulted you. I just pointed a few things out from how it looks.

@ignoramous

My point was: for a system with 100+ servers world-wide, I don’t think abuse prevention is merely a single integer somewhere. Now, if I point out I’ve built services running on more than 100K servers, you’ll pile up on me, so I’ll leave folks to their bubble where a single integer magically solves problems relating to abuse, auditing, metering, and what not.

No, you would be in a position though to suggest what specific types of data would not be a simple counter however. That way you’re presenting us with a fact to convince us of your position.