
Battle over Encrypted DNS - chkaloon
https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-draws-house-antitrust-scrutiny-of-internet-protocol-11569765637?mod=rsswn
======
seraphsf
Ridiculous... the cable and wireless companies expose their moral bankruptcy
with this lobbying.

"Traffic shaping" to manage the network is a reasonable goal (whether or not
you agree with it). "Monetizing consumer data" is slightly less reasonable,
but still arguably reasonable. It is, however, NOT OK to do this without clear
Notice, Transparency, and Choice to the consumer.

Today, these large ISPs do the opposite: hiding their behavior, offering no
choice, and now enlisting lawmakers to eliminate alternatives.

The cable and wireless providers should ask their customers: are you OK with
unencrypted DNS (a less-safe protocol) in return for lower prices (because we
can throttle certain streams and monetize with advertising data)?

Or, if they suspect (rightly) that most customers would say "hell no"... these
ISPs should offer a competitive encrypted DNS solution of their own. You're
Internet service providers, for heaven's sake -- provide a modern Internet
service, instead of regulating that your customers use your inferior legacy
DNS!

------
sroussey
Actual title: “Google Draws House Antitrust Scrutiny of Internet Protocol”

HN title: “Battle over Encrypted DNS”

Real title: “Cable and wireless monopolies caught stealing consumer data and
selling it, ask Congress and Media to force Mozilla and Google to stay with
unsafe internet protocol so they can continue to sell their customers”

~~~
eqvinox
Real real title: "Battle over Centralized DNS"

(I'm guessing they're talking about DoH, I'm not a WSJ subscriber and can't
read the actual article.)

------
ajurna
is it beyond them to supply their own DoT or DoH services (maintaining the
info they have) and then using that as a selling point?

