Privacy

31808 readers

368 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

Chat rooms

[Matrix/Element]Dead
Discord

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

DoH vs DNScrypt (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by badgrandpa@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

15 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hi guys,

I was searching which protocol is better for privacy and so far DNScrypt is better (according to my research).

What’s your opinion?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Laser@feddit.de 12 points 1 year ago

They want people to use easily tracked TCP. UDP is a simple request, TCP has to establish the connection, QUIC by Google is even worse.

None of this makes sense (except maybe that TCP is stateful). What "easily tracked" is supposed to mean here I have no idea. Any information you can get from TCP are included in UDP from a privacy standpoint. The concept of a request doesn't exist in UDP. The actual request in the DNS sense is very similar for all protocols. QUIC is UDP from a network protocol point of view, but it adds features commonly found in clients that need secure connections over UDP.

I prefer DoT

Which uses TCP.