# Shutting down our public encrypted DNS servers and sponsoring Quad9 instead **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/shutting-down-our-public-encrypted-dns-servers-and-sponsoring-quad9-instead/40439 **Category:** General **Created:** 2026-09-03T12:08:16Z **Posts:** 26 ## Post 1 by @any1 — 2026-09-03T12:08:16Z > **[Shutting down our public encrypted DNS servers and sponsoring Quad9 instead |...](https://mullvad.net/en/blog/shutting-down-our-public-encrypted-dns-servers-and-sponsoring-quad9-instead)** > > Mullvad has operated public encrypted DNS (DoH) servers since 2022. They are unnecessary when using Mullvad VPN — traffic is already encrypted and Mullvad VPN's internal DNS handles all queries. --- ## Post 2 by @mid — 2026-09-03T12:08:59Z They’re shutting down everything. --- ## Post 3 by @fiqiluvo.epileto — 2026-09-03T12:10:39Z Does Quad9 offer the same blocklists/granularity in ad blocking? With mullvad, it was quite easy for me to inspect what kinds of lists they’re using on their GitHub. I guess the cancellation did hurt them after all. --- ## Post 4 by @any1 — 2026-09-03T12:11:46Z > [@fiqiluvo.epileto](#): > > I guess the cancellation did hurt them after all. [https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/mullvad-browser/-/work\_items/534](https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/applications/mullvad-browser/-/work_items/534) this was already planned before that happened --- ## Post 5 by @fiqiluvo.epileto — 2026-09-03T12:12:57Z I’m using mullvad vpn and get > 403: Access limited :grin: --- ## Post 6 by @Footnote5444 — 2026-09-03T12:17:34Z To answer your first question, no. Quad9 only blocks malware domains. They don’t offer ad/tracking blocking domains like Mullvad did. Alternative options if that is what you are looking for and want it to be free are probably Control D’s free resolver options or AdGuard’s free public DNS option. --- ## Post 7 by @fiqiluvo.epileto — 2026-09-03T12:19:43Z Sad. --- ## Post 8 by @ElectricEye — 2026-09-03T12:20:35Z > [@Footnote5444](#): > > Alternative options if that is what you are looking for and want it to be free are probably Control D’s free resolver options or AdGuard’s free public DNS option. I can also recommend NextDNS. --- ## Post 9 by @Footnote5444 — 2026-09-03T12:28:12Z NextDNS’ free option is capped at 300k requests. Light users will likely stay under that, but heavy users or users with devices that phone home a bunch (Windows, Android, etc.) are going to blow past that. Once a free user hits that cap, the rest of their domain requests via NextDNS are resolved, but no blocking occurs. The AdGuard and Control D free options have no such cap AFAIK. --- ## Post 10 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-09-03T12:36:59Z @ignoramous may need to remove Mulvad DNS options from your next RDNS release --- ## Post 11 by @ignoramous — 2026-09-03T13:07:35Z Atrocious from Mullvad. It is amazing how they have got just the right justification for every single thing they do. It wasn’t great when NextDNS did this with `dns0.eu`. Notice how both these providers (who are deprecating something as fundamental as DNS without viable migration paths) from underneath all their users were readily recommended by PG, while other DNS providers that have been discussed here in the community forums barely get a look in. A [lesson](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/nextdns-logging-is-opt-out-not-opt-in-as-stated-on-pgs-dns-resolvers-recommendations-page/17206/51) in how ~~fanboism~~ loyalty works. > [@privacy.slouchy](#): > > may need to remove Mulvad DNS options At least they could let Quad9 serve the same subdomain. This is something Quad9 should support (I know this because we approached Quad9 to handle part of RDNS traffic back when our monthly costs due to high traffic were beyond what I could personally cover; but we didn’t due to our no-logs stance). > [@privacy.slouchy](#): > > your next RDNS release Thanks for the heads up. More than 50% of the user base (according to Play Store stats) use older versions. This is not going to end well for those who wouldn’t update. _Sigh_. > > > Bloody hell: https://mullvad.net/en/blog/shutting-down-our-public-encrypted-dns-…servers-and-sponsoring-quad9-instead --- ## Post 12 by @Lukas — 2026-09-03T13:51:46Z > [@fiqiluvo.epileto](#): > > I guess the cancellation did hurt them after all. Sad world we are living in. --- ## Post 13 by @yolakalemowa — 2026-09-03T14:47:50Z > [@fiqiluvo.epileto](#): > > I guess the cancellation did hurt them after all. what cancellation? could you clarify? --- ## Post 14 by @any1 — 2026-09-03T14:48:32Z > [@yolakalemowa](#): > > what cancellation? could you clarify? > [@Mullvad response to donation controversy](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/mullvad-response-to-donation-controversy/39250): > > We would like to address the recent controversy about one of the owners of Mullvad making a donation to a Swedish political party. It was a private donation from Daniel the individual. Mullvad or its parent and sister companies did not endorse and were not involved in it. Since it has attracted attention and questions we still think it appropriate to comment. Mullvad is a political company. We fight for freedom of speech, freedom of information and the right to privacy. One way we achieve t… --- ## Post 15 by @yolakalemowa — 2026-09-03T14:49:13Z @any1 oh ok. but what does that have to do with canceling DNS? to cut costs you mean? --- ## Post 16 by @any1 — 2026-09-03T14:52:13Z They thought that the controversy forced them to start cutting costs, since they might have less money now. I linked above that this was planned before the controversy even happend. --- ## Post 17 by @DucksLive — 2026-09-03T15:26:18Z Au contraire, I applaud those who strive to stay true to their personal values as best possible. Watering down ones values to meet those of indifferent CEOs and companies because the service or product satisfies us, is a trap of human nature. Keeping ones integrity is most often not fashionable, nor free, nor convenient, and certainly not easy. Also never fully obtainable in some scenarios as the landscape is ever changing, sometimes hard choices of only non-optimal options. It’s not a set-and -forget, it’s a journey of self-relection and making the best decisions with the information on hand at any point in time. And of embracing change to reflect those values when needed. --- ## Post 18 by @Enid — 2026-09-03T15:28:43Z It is sad. Last year is Leta from Mullvad. Now is DNS :frowning: . --- ## Post 19 by @overdrawn98901 — 2026-09-03T16:04:15Z Where is my angry emote react for cases like this :angry: --- ## Post 20 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-09-03T16:50:26Z > [@ignoramous](#): > > recommended by PG Shit, I forgot PG recommended Mulvad for encrypted DNS Ive gone ahead and officially proposed its removal [here](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/remove-mulvad-dns-resolver/40453/1), I encourage yall to migrate discussion to that effect over to that thread --- ## Post 21 by @ph00lt0 — 2026-09-03T19:51:34Z ControlD is not very stable in my experience. --- ## Post 22 by @Footnote5444 — 2026-09-04T02:08:15Z Might depend on where you are located? I haven’t used them a ton - I’m an AdGuard DNS subscriber- but I have no issues with Control D’s sever stability or speeds in North America. But they are also based out of Canada IIRC, so very possible that is a different story elsewhere. --- ## Post 23 by @ice5479 — 2026-09-05T11:03:59Z I have a premium NextDNS that I use with Brave but I have always used the default Mullvad DNS for Mullvad Browser, as I had read somewhere that it helps with fingerprinting and Mullvad Browser + NextDNS stands out more vs the default Mullvad DNS. Now that they are closing it, would it be better to just use Quad 9 like they recommend or are there any downsides to using NextDNS? --- ## Post 24 by @tomasz86 — 2026-09-05T18:48:00Z > [@Footnote5444](#): > > Might depend on where you are located? I haven’t used them a ton - I’m an AdGuard DNS subscriber- but I have no issues with Control D’s sever stability or speeds in North America. > > But they are also based out of Canada IIRC, so very possible that is a different story elsewhere. I’ve also experienced a lot of problems every time when trying to use Control D. This was in Poland, and the same issues occurred on multiple devices and networks (with no VPN or similar involved). The servers were just unresponsive on a regular basis, often leading to DNS failing to resolve. In the end, I just gave up on them completely. --- ## Post 25 by @Footnote5444 — 2026-09-06T12:40:33Z Interesting. Thanks for the insight. I haven’t used Control D much, but I do occasionally use their free DNS option if something in my current AdGuard setup is causing issues, but I don’t want to change blocklists OR mess with allowlists. In that limited sense I have had no such issues, but that is disappointing that others are encountering issues. --- ## Post 26 by @hbxc0re — 2026-09-06T17:55:35Z I’m currently using AdGuard and Quad9 DNS servers on my AdGuard Home DNS server. I was using Mullvad, but migrated because of this very issue. It’s an unfortunate set of events.