I didn't read the article thoroughly, and parts of it I only skimmed, but I kind of get the feeling that, for some of the issues he addresses, the author's great conviction might be a bit stronger than his actual arguments or information.
For example, with regard to Mozilla's use of Cloudflare's DNS over HTTPS and their agreement regarding logging and privacy, he writes:
> Anyone who has worked with DNS servers knows what goes into such logs and in order for Cloudflare to keep their promise they need to: Delete the DNS requests information, but at the same time somehow still keep "anonymized" logs of the total number of requests, a list of all domain names requested, a so-called "sample" of complete DNS queries along with date and time.
I don't see how those are contradictory (except possibly for the last one, depending on what "complete" means). I don't know how DNS logs are stored but it should be entirely possible to first aggregate information and then get rid of the logs. Some other information might be harder to maintain an aggregate of after getting rid of the source data, but it's often more or less possible, and total counts of whatever should be trivial.
I'm not saying he's wrong; I'm just saying I get the feeling he might not have quite as strong a case for some of the many issues he brings up as his aggressive tone makes it sound.
For example, with regard to Mozilla's use of Cloudflare's DNS over HTTPS and their agreement regarding logging and privacy, he writes:
> Anyone who has worked with DNS servers knows what goes into such logs and in order for Cloudflare to keep their promise they need to: Delete the DNS requests information, but at the same time somehow still keep "anonymized" logs of the total number of requests, a list of all domain names requested, a so-called "sample" of complete DNS queries along with date and time.
I don't see how those are contradictory (except possibly for the last one, depending on what "complete" means). I don't know how DNS logs are stored but it should be entirely possible to first aggregate information and then get rid of the logs. Some other information might be harder to maintain an aggregate of after getting rid of the source data, but it's often more or less possible, and total counts of whatever should be trivial.
I'm not saying he's wrong; I'm just saying I get the feeling he might not have quite as strong a case for some of the many issues he brings up as his aggressive tone makes it sound.