>We want a public service to be available. Going forward, we will support Quad9 instead of running it ourselves. Running a privacy-focused public DNS service is a highly specialized undertaking, and the Quad9 Foundation is the undisputed leader in the field. Rather than duplicating their efforts to achieve only part of what they do, we're putting those resources toward financially supporting Quad9 instead.
Unfortunately, Quad9 is censoring some domains in Europe (notably in France and Italy) following injunctions issued by rights holders [1]. That was not the case with Mullvad's DNS.
> The German courts entirely disregarded our use of geo-IP lookups on queries, and asserted that since tests via a VPN were able to resolve the domain, we were in breach of court orders
Seriously, what the fuck? So you're supposed to block VPNs as well? What's next, Tor exit nodes? New VPN and Tor nodes as they pop up? I really don't like where this is going.
>Since Quad9 already performs DNSSEC validation, DNSSEC being enabled in the forwarder will cause a duplication of the DNSSEC process, significantly reducing performance and potentially causing false BOGUS responses.
This sounds dodgy. Surely that means Quad9 can poison my DNS?
I use Clouldflare DoT and enabled validation in systemd-resolved some time ago. Not because I would be particularly paranoid, but more out of curiosity how it works. I noticed no problems, except for with Atlassian. They use 2 second level domains (at least), one under .com signed and one under .net (unsigned) (IIRC). Most things worked like normal, but some Jira extension stopped working. Turned out that systemd did reject their signed subdomains. Could not figure out whether the rejection was justified or not. When I asked Claude 7 times about it, I also got 7 contradicting answers... Reported to Atlassian support that their signing is incorrect (some delegation missing). To my surprise they replied: Are you using systemd? And gave a bug number that systemd handles validation wrong in their case.
Haven't had time to study the bug and really understand the whole issue myself. Just left it there with the takeaway that local validation is currently not for non-experts.
(Sorry not at my computer. Details rather vague from memory.)
Technically yes, in practice the odds your local resolver is validating DNSSEC is slim (and if you're intentionally configured it to do so, switch to a provider that isn't Quad9).
That's something people should run themselves. I run Adguard Home on my router. Unlike the main Adguard product, Adguard Home is fully FOSS. It's been rock-solid for me, and improves on pi-hole in various ways - like full IPv6 support.
Mullvad had adblocking, malware blocking. And they didn’t block websites from governments blacklists in France and Italy. None of these features are available on Quad9.
This is a very important detail. Adblock in 2026 is necessary and DNS will transparently do a lot of that work for you. It isn't just about lightning fast lookups and five-nines uptime anymore.
My internet is rock solid and super fast, extra low latencies. OpenWRT shapes my traffic to 90% of line speeds, so zero bufferbloat on my end. All my devices connect to this setup. The proxmox box is just an old dual core mini-pc with 8gb ram and 2x 1gbps NIC's and a wifi 6 module for 2.3gbps wireless (only 5Ghz, no 2.4Ghz). I want to replace this box with a new one to get 2.5gb ethernet & better power efficiency as my box is a 51W cpu, but total powerdraw is about 20w without causing wifi to drop. Aggressive power saving can make wifi unstable.
I'm all for supporting quad9; but what if we just disable dnssec instead, it really solves nothing and continued support of it just makes it show up in compliance guides unnecessarily.
I'm always wondering whether those centralized privacy services are not the easiest first target for three-letter-agencies to infiltrate to gain access to the most relevant users to track - and what currently would prevent them from doing so if they haven't already ? Maybe, as with the case of many TOR nodes , they might be running them.
I don't think there's any company with useful information on the American public that isn't being forced to regularly hand over that data. That's probably been true to some extent for a long time (see Room 641A) but it's certainly gotten worse. At this point you can't check out a book from the library without the feds demanding that your librarian turn over a list of everything you've ever read, or rent a hotel room for a night without the hotel being forced to provide your information to the government.
Use an online service that's new enough and small enough and it might not be compromised, but the moment it gets popular men with guns and national security letters with gag orders will show up to install hardware on their prem, take over entire offices, or just demand reports.
VPNs and secure DNS services aren't there to keep your data from the NSA, ICE, or even the police. They are useful for keeping your ISP from selling your browsing history to anyone willing to pay them (https://www.mitnicksecurity.com/in-the-news/republicans-just...). It'll help keep a little of what you do online away from data brokers, keep your ISP from sending you DMCA notices, and not much else.
For clarification, this is completely true of the US, without needing to speculate, thanks to a combination of FISA 702, the ECPA, CALEA, EO 12333, and the CLOUD act. It all has legal footing in the States.
However, it's not at all the reality of a vast swath of other countries (or, at least, not yet; see Chat Control v2). The US is particularly foul (and effective) when it comes to this practice, but anything outside of US jurisdiction that doesn't have an office in the US can't be touched by laws like these, and the laws of most other countries tend to be significantly less invasive than American ones when it comes to data interception and the practices surrounding it.
Adversaries don't always ask nicely. Sometimes they break in and silently take the data. These services centralize traffic flows and make it so that an adversary only needs to tap one or two circuits to get a full picture for all users of a service.
Quad9 is a reasonable choice given the stance on privacy and the similar jurisdiction (Mullvad would probably face the same takedown orders as Quad9), but really anyone who cares about bypassing national blocking orders should run a local caching recursive resolver. Unbound is a great choice.
Unbound can also be used to block malware and advertising domains using shared public lists, or you can build your own list. Your resolver’s DNS queries could be piped through Mullvad or Tor if you want additional privacy.
I don’t honestly see how that’s necessarily better. Now your ISP can tap your individual household to see what’s being queried. Whereas if you use Do[THU] to connect to some remote recursive resolver it practically functions as a mixer.
That’s why I suggested routing queries through a VPN or Tor if that’s a concern. This bypasses centralized DNS services that may face national blocking orders while retaining privacy.
This feels like a nitpick but it's important to mention anyway
> Mullvad Browser uses them [ the DoH servers ] by default when you're not on Mullvad VPN, preventing your ISP from seeing the domains you visit.
This is a half-truth until Encrypted Client Hello (ECH) is in-use for most of your traffic. Sure, you won't have clear-text DNS floating out there in the series of tubes. However, without ECH the hostname you're connecting to is exposed in the SNI field during TLS handshakes.
I imagine most sites we are browsing will eventually be able to leverage ECH, so this should become less of an issue over time, but in the event you frequent any self-hosted operations (e.g. no Cloudflare or similar), encrypted client hello could still reveal identifying information since it requires still exposing an "outer SNI" that a valid certificate needs to be presented for. You only get to easily hide in with the masses when you use a big infrastructure provider as a consequence, since the common outer SNI of cloudflare-ech.com doesn't really reveal anything different than an IP <-> ASN database would. But if the outer SNI is "dunder-cat-enterprises.com", then all I've protected you from is your ISP snooping on the subdomain or pinpointing exactly which one of my domains you might be talking to.
Even ECH isn't that helpful. ISP still sees the IP addresses you connect to. Even when non-dedicated IPs are used, I'd be surprised if a quite basic traffic analysis (say, bytes transferred on first visit) wouldn't identify the domain.
VPN providers at the tier of Mullvad should be precise about this stuff -- I think it's more than just a nitpick, considering the audience. oh god did I just use an emdash.
Note that you need some flavor of secure DNS to enforce ECH. The protocol is designed to be downgradable.
For awhile I self-hosted adguard dns server. It supports iphone profiles thus forcing iOS DNS. I eventually disabled it due to timeout issues specific to iOS. Issue was something DNSSEC related.
While reproing the issue I noted the average recursor round trip time from my OVH server hosted in Oregon to the default upstream DNS - Quad9 - was around 70ms. When I changed it to Hurricane Electric the roundtrip dropped to a steady 20ms. Later I changed it again to Cloudflare and the roundtrip was a consistent 2 to 3ms.
Hi - I'm with Quad9 (CTO). I'm going to try to put together a single post replying to some of these topics.
First: We welcome the Mullvad users who will be shifted onto our systems, and we appreciate that Mullvad contacted us instead of doing this unilaterally. Since we have no signup process, they could have just moved users across but we very much appreciate their cooperation and communication, both with us and with the users of the service - this is exactly how an ideal transfer should go, at least from our perspective.
I'll try to make some short summaries of some of the points here, and a reply on each.
"You should just run your own DNS server - it's easy." - Yes, we agree that for a small company or home running your own recursive resolver is a reasonable solution. You probably won't get the threat mitigation depth of service that Quad9 offers, but you may not want that. Privacy also suffers a bit, since it's still the same IP address (your home "public" address) sending queries to authoritative servers, probably unencrypted. A good middle compromise is to run PiHole or AdGuard software, and forward your queries to Quad9 via an encrypted connection. (see below) This mixes your queries in with a large number of other users, and gets the potential improvements of having a much larger active cache nearby which will have "hot" answers.
Running a home resolver for yourself or even a few dozen (or even a few hundred) people is not difficult. But with all services, things change with scale. As the query volume and number of locations grow, you soon find yourself hitting all possible exception cases, instantly. Many millions of requests a second requires a lot of time, expertise, and money to ensure nearly 100% uptime. We are admittedly quite a small group - less than 10 full time - but even that is under-staffed for supporting more than 100 million daily users. We do quite a bit with a very small resource set, and I doubt it could be done less expensively with the same robustness for the same scale. Again, we appreciate Mullvad's sponsorship to help keep this expanding at our normal weekly growth rate of around 2%.
"I want ad blocking, and Quad9 doesn't do that" - Correct, Quad9 does not do ad blocking at this time. There are good solutions like PiHole or AdGuard extensions that provide this functionality, and getting local control and logging of your DNS queries is probably useful for power users. There are also commercial platforms that provide this capability, and they may provide significantly more "knobs" for what you want to block. Quad9 is a non-profit - we're not out to corner the market, and as long as privacy and security is increased for the end user, we're all for commercial solutions!
"Quad9 blocks domains in Germany" - Currently there are no mandatory blocks that Quad9 is integrating or enforcing on our DNS platform, from any external party. We did briefly block some domains as a result of legal actions against us in Germany. The good news is that we won that case in Germany, after two years and three appeals and an enormous amount of time and money (which despite Germany's "loser pays" rule, is not even close to expenditures.) https://quad9.net/news/blog/quad9-turns-the-sony-case-around... The bad news is that the identical thing is happening now in France where we have a number of legal cases open against Quad9, and we do not see an end to this any time soon as long as there is an open question in the EU about what a content-neutral intermediary is and is not required to do.
"Mullvad exiting creates more centralization, and that is bad." On the fact that centralization is bad, we agree. DNS resolver centralization is not a great thing, and it seems to be trending in the wrong direction. It's not just large public resolvers - consolidation in the ISP industry is causing more and more of the world's internet-using population to utilize a smaller number of recursive servers. Those servers are operated (mostly) by law-abiding companies, and so there is a strong interest by various parties interested in control of content to "put a hand on the available throat" even though it's the wrong throat to choke. We're busy with some ideas of how to solve this, both from a legal defense position as well as a technology position - stay tuned in the coming months. In the meantime, you can contribute a few euros/francs/dollars to us and we'll have more funds to pay for legal defense in France and hopefully up to the EU courts. https://quad9.net/donate/
"Government agencies can tap data" - Quad9 is based in Switzerland. Despite what may be common knowledge from movies, there is a very formal and rigorous process for governments (Swiss or non-Swiss) to demand data. It is (ultimately) transparent, and managed in a way that is quite well structured - this is, after all, what the Swiss have been doing with financial data for many years. More importantly: Quad9 stores no user data about queries. There isn't anything to demand - the box of data is quite empty. Because of this technological decision and our wide announcement of it (https://quad9.net/about/transparency-report/) we have never received a request for data.
As for technological methods: Quad9 operates in 200+ widely-separated locations, with no backbone or central data transport network - it is intentionally 'islanded'. It would be a significant challenge to intercept data at all those locations, though we're certain that there are many queries that are observed due to their presence on various ISP or cable networks which are under surveillance.
We support all major DNS encryption methods today (even the two that run on QUIC - HTTP/3 and DOQ) and we encourage users to use one of those for their communications to us. We are also one of the few major resolvers experimenting with ADOx, which encrypts messages between the recursive resolver and authoritative server. (https://dnsprivacy.org/adox_status_and_deployment/)
> On the fact that centralization is bad, we agree. DNS resolver centralization is not a great thing, and it seems to be trending in the wrong direction.
It seems all too similar to the degradation of peer-to-peer networks where nodes are replaced by few supernodes. You mentioned a couple reasons yourself: consolidation and legal pressure. Add to this the technical qualification aspect and time investment (Mullvad's position), and the financial cost of sustaining such a non-profit project. Suddenly there are very few people or even organizations worldwide, who can bear the burden.
> Quad9 is based in Switzerland. Despite what may be common knowledge from movies, there is a very formal and rigorous process for governments (Swiss or non-Swiss) to demand data.
Due to Lugano Convention [0] / Budapest Convention [1] / Hague Convention etc, I don't see how Switzerland is any more insulated than, say, Norway is (both these countries are part of EFTA & signatories to various UN/EU/EFTA treaties). Per this article [2], Switzerland ranks below Ireland, Portugal, Denmark, France in Data privacy laws (in fact, it ranks the same as the UK).
If I am being honest, at this point, "based in Switzerland" (or Cyprus or Sweden or Gibraltar) comes across as marketing gimmick VPN companies are notorious for.
Our goal is not "insulation" as much as it is "transparency." Governments that do not adhere to legal frameworks like the ones you reference above are also governments that have inconsistent or easily-changed legal structures - we are not hiding in some obscure and possibly unstable nation that ignores international standards. Our jurisdictional choice of Switzerland is the opposite of that. Switzerland has a strong history of making legal enforcement events transparent, with processes that follow expected process. We cannot avoid following the law, nor is that our goal.
Swiss data privacy law is also much more strict on us, which "puts our money where out mouth is" as the saying goes. Violating privacy laws in Switzerland may result in criminal penalties, not simply civil penalties - jail time, rather than just fines.
Thanks for this! I was looking at your transparency report (https://quad9.net/about/transparency-report/) and I notice 2026 is not included in the 'list of years in which we have not received a request for data', despite the list being updated quarterly according to the text below it. When I saw the page earlier, I assumed that either the list isn't actually updated quarterly, or I'd discovered an exciting example of a warrant canary.
No, canaries in our opinion are not a particularly good idea for a variety of reasons. We have not received any requests/demands for information in 2026 - we'll try to update the page to reflect that this is no longer a quarterly update.
I saw your response about not blocking ads currently.
What about blocking adult content, for a child's computer? Mullvad had such an option[1] under family.dns.mullvad.net. Very useful!
This is an area that is fraught with challenges. Serving a truly global audience means standards are difficult to measure as to what is "adult content" - it varies widely (Wikipedia in some areas is "adult content", as an example.)
In the near term, there is no filter set that we offer that mimics that functionality.
However, we recognize some variation of "best effort" adult content segmentation is a useful filter to have. We're considering it in the near term, as we have some specific educational institutional pressure to try to meet as well, since students are often easy targets for phishing, classroom computers are rife with malware, and there is also the problem of inappropriate DNS-based profiling of students and schools - problems that Quad9 can help solve.
Thanks for the clarification, I mistakenly assumed you were also required to block sanctioned media (mostly Russian/Iranian), but upon further research apparently that only applies to ISP DNS.
You are probably the guy to ask. I have always found dns over TLS to be the fastest, but with the quic versions making an entrance, maybe things have changed. Which is the one that gives me the fastest replies?
We actually quite like DOQ and DOH3, both of which use QUIC.
All modern Apple systems use QUIC. For instance if given 9.9.9.9 via DHCP they will automatically upgrade to encryption via DDR, then then upgrade to DOH3 with no intervention by the end user. We find that encryption load is lower with QUIC-based transports, but we need to really get a formal research paper together on that "in our spare time."
Faster? Probably, but is it measurably "better" remains a question for others to answer. Due to parallelism in most query sets, minor wins with DNS latency matter less than you might think.
Not OP but I don’t think DoQ is very interesting. DoH is nice because it blends in with HTTPS. Both do the protocol level things to avoid connection handshakes. The HTTP overhead isn’t that much really.
DoT is more complex than you’d imagine because it has to try hard to implement its own solutions to avoid handshakes.
Been using them for years. The price is reasonable too. It’s the only way I found to block ads everywhere on iOS (except the YT app, Mullvad’s Albania wireguard did that)
I stopped using Mullvad when they discontinued OpenVPN support (another one to add to the parent list). OpenVPN, if nothing else, provides a wider array of connection options that have a better chance of fulfilling your specific network needs. It supports both UDP and TCP, unlike WireGuard.
I say this respectfully, but Mullvad is perhaps “dumbing down” their VPN service in an effort to simplify their operations and cater to a wider and more general audience.
I've found DoH was pretty unusable for me on Windows because the TCP connection doesn't seem to stay open between queries. No idea if it's a software or network issue, but big unpredictable delays on DNS queries broke all kinds of weird unexpected stuff.
NB. I don't use Windows and I don't use "Private DNS". I'm referring to using HTTP/1.1 pipelining^1 with a TCP client plus TLS forward proxy or HTTP/2 with an ldns-based client to fetch DNS data in bulk, outside the browser, from the command line. I got some incredible speeds from Mullvad
1. Not every service still supports 1.1, RFC recommends H2
The old heads out there might remember a time when, rather than everyone using one service provider (ex. for Linux binaries/source), we all mutually agreed to use independently run mirrors closer to us. We sort of had to because of bandwidth and latency limits. But it meant that there were a thousand different people providing the same service. Impossible to censor everyone, everyone shares the load, too many places to hack if you wanted to massively compromise, and the users won.
DNS is harder to do that way because it's hard to have limits on DNS. Perhaps DNS could be adapted with QUIC, to allow fast, encrypted DNS that's easier to rate-limit, and then it'd be easier for average people to run public mirrors with limits.
What does everybody here think about Daniel Berntsson, founder and co-owner of Mullvad, personally donating 5 million Swedish krona to the populist Örebro party, criticized for its stances on race & immigration?
I'm not trying to start an unhealthy discussion about this topic, genuinely curious about your opinion on the matter.
Irrespective of political affiliations, I felt that Mullvad addressed the outrage in a mature and non culture war manner. Because of how they handled the situation, I have a lot more respect for the company.
It's great that they didn't try to cancel the guy or get seduced into driving a wedge into their team. It is great they chose their principle over pleasing the crowd in such a transparent way.
I have been a customer for many years. I once even used the cash payment option out of curiosity.
He is in his full right to support whatever party he wants?
Those parties exists for a reason, a response to certain pressures. Nothing happens in isolation. If you zoom out a bit and if you can for a second try to empathize with both sides, you will often find that both sides of an issue is correct, reasonable & rational from their own perspectives. It is often more an emotional response than one of pure survival.
The more you force things on people or suppress them, the more they will resist & push back. The rise of the far-right is not random or just pure evil manifesting out of thin air. It is like a acute inflammatory/immune system response. Obviously it can be exploited by bad actors to further inflame/divide & accelerate certain agendas. Often times extremism takes hold when certain justices are denied (which is in fact evil).
Life is best if you assume the guy on the other side (90% of a group) is just a bro trying to survive & have no real bad intent towards you, they don't know you or have been in your shoes, and the other way around too. Thus it is very important to become non-reactive, become observant who is trying to stoke the flames, who benefits from the chaos and so on.
Their DoH going down for hours multiple times is what forced me back to cloudflare, i don't trust cloudflare more but at least it works consistently.
Additionally the default of blocking 'malware' doesn't jive with uncensored internet - that should be an opt in and not a default on their flagship address if they want to be taken seriously as unfiltered provider.
If the encrypted endpoint can go down for extended periods and they curate list of 'malware' they are not something that should be considered a gateway to uncensored and open internet.
I frequently get mini failures with quad9 and my DNS client is too dumb to retry with another server (or quad9 returns a valid but bogus response that prevents my client from hoping to the next server) so I had to ditch quad9.
Quad9 also has worse latency but I could live with it, I just can't live with web pages failing to load several times per day(especially hacker News that has their DNS TTL set to 1 second)
It doesn't happen with my ISP's servers nor with CloudFlare or google or even good ol' L3.
Apologies for political commentary, but I just say this in drew defaults blog:
“
Daniel Berntsson
Known for: Mullvad VPN (co-founder, co-owner)
Daniel is the co-founder of Mullvad VPN, alongside Fredrik Strömberg. In June 2026, Daniel donated 5M Swedish Krona (~$500,000 USD) to the populist anti-immigration Örebro Party,[source] saying “it’s sad that it’s needed”. The party supports the ethnic cleansing of non-white people from Sweden, and Daniel’s donation represented, at the time, 72% of the party’s revenue. Daniel cited immigration as a motivating factor for his donation.”
disappointing, because alternatives matter too. quad9 and other well known servers are potentially blocked by some countries, so the more lesser known services there are the better.
Mullvad talks a lot about decentralization, then hands its resolver users to one of the biggest resolvers going. Quad9 is a good operator, and they actually fought Sony in German court instead of quietly complying. They still got ordered to block. That's the problem. A blocking order only hurts as much as the resolver it lands on is used, so every operator that shuts down and sends its users to Quad9 makes the next order a better deal for whoever files it.
exactly. and those servers are also easily blocked because they are known publicly. i see this problem right now. 4 out of 5 providers that i tried are not working from where i am
Translation: one of Mullvad’s two cofounders has donated money to Örebropartiet, a left-leaning Swedish political party that promotes strict and restrictive immigration laws.
They are not far right, AFAICT they are “right” Marxists, probably most similar to Albanian Hoxhaism.
If you aren’t familiar with splits inside Marxism-Leninism, the “left” is most often represented by Trotskyism with the “right” tendency being more like Stalinism and North Korean Juche. (Note that these left/right terms aren’t universally used or applied because every faction claims to be correct.)
> Running a privacy-focused public DNS service is a highly specialized undertaking
This seems like an overstatement: I have been running my own recursive DNS with Unbound for years and never thought it was a "highly specialized undertaking." It took perhaps a couple of hours to set up in the pre-AI age. I filter ads and trackers using an aggressive blacklist[0].
This dude has been doing it for 25 years, and actually this is a dns provider for domain names which I'm decently sure makes it more complicated than public dns.
They're allowed to say they don't want to pay for it anymore, I just think their logic is bad. Or maybe their lawyer said they're running risks just ignoring takedown and they didn't want to deal with it anymore.
>We want a public service to be available. Going forward, we will support Quad9 instead of running it ourselves. Running a privacy-focused public DNS service is a highly specialized undertaking, and the Quad9 Foundation is the undisputed leader in the field. Rather than duplicating their efforts to achieve only part of what they do, we're putting those resources toward financially supporting Quad9 instead.
Brilliant.
Unfortunately, Quad9 is censoring some domains in Europe (notably in France and Italy) following injunctions issued by rights holders [1]. That was not the case with Mullvad's DNS.
[1] https://quad9.net/news/blog/italian-blocking-demands-followi...
> The German courts entirely disregarded our use of geo-IP lookups on queries, and asserted that since tests via a VPN were able to resolve the domain, we were in breach of court orders
Seriously, what the fuck? So you're supposed to block VPNs as well? What's next, Tor exit nodes? New VPN and Tor nodes as they pop up? I really don't like where this is going.
87 replies →
At this point my vote is to just shut off the internet entirely in the EU
On the Quad9 website:
>Since Quad9 already performs DNSSEC validation, DNSSEC being enabled in the forwarder will cause a duplication of the DNSSEC process, significantly reducing performance and potentially causing false BOGUS responses.
This sounds dodgy. Surely that means Quad9 can poison my DNS?
I use Clouldflare DoT and enabled validation in systemd-resolved some time ago. Not because I would be particularly paranoid, but more out of curiosity how it works. I noticed no problems, except for with Atlassian. They use 2 second level domains (at least), one under .com signed and one under .net (unsigned) (IIRC). Most things worked like normal, but some Jira extension stopped working. Turned out that systemd did reject their signed subdomains. Could not figure out whether the rejection was justified or not. When I asked Claude 7 times about it, I also got 7 contradicting answers... Reported to Atlassian support that their signing is incorrect (some delegation missing). To my surprise they replied: Are you using systemd? And gave a bug number that systemd handles validation wrong in their case.
Haven't had time to study the bug and really understand the whole issue myself. Just left it there with the takeaway that local validation is currently not for non-experts.
(Sorry not at my computer. Details rather vague from memory.)
Not if Quad9 is using DNSSEC, no.
What's the specific threat you're envisioning? If it involves Quad9 themselves being malicious, what would DNSSEC on the forwarding prevent?
This page explains how all of this works in detail: https://quad9.net/news/blog/quad9-enables-dnssec-on-all-serv...
11 replies →
Technically yes, in practice the odds your local resolver is validating DNSSEC is slim (and if you're intentionally configured it to do so, switch to a provider that isn't Quad9).
Quad9 doesn't have an adblocking DNS service though, so it's not really a replacement.
That's something people should run themselves. I run Adguard Home on my router. Unlike the main Adguard product, Adguard Home is fully FOSS. It's been rock-solid for me, and improves on pi-hole in various ways - like full IPv6 support.
19 replies →
Mullvad had adblocking, malware blocking. And they didn’t block websites from governments blacklists in France and Italy. None of these features are available on Quad9.
Maybe it’s time to try nym.com?
This is a very important detail. Adblock in 2026 is necessary and DNS will transparently do a lot of that work for you. It isn't just about lightning fast lookups and five-nines uptime anymore.
9 replies →
My setup goes like this:
Fiber ONT -> Proxmox x86 -> OpenWRT -> Adguard Home -> unbound -> Quad9.
Browser: Firefox + ublock origin & privacy badger & strict privacy setting & Https-only.
My internet is rock solid and super fast, extra low latencies. OpenWRT shapes my traffic to 90% of line speeds, so zero bufferbloat on my end. All my devices connect to this setup. The proxmox box is just an old dual core mini-pc with 8gb ram and 2x 1gbps NIC's and a wifi 6 module for 2.3gbps wireless (only 5Ghz, no 2.4Ghz). I want to replace this box with a new one to get 2.5gb ethernet & better power efficiency as my box is a 51W cpu, but total powerdraw is about 20w without causing wifi to drop. Aggressive power saving can make wifi unstable.
I've been using Control D and have been happy with it so far
I'm all for supporting quad9; but what if we just disable dnssec instead, it really solves nothing and continued support of it just makes it show up in compliance guides unnecessarily.
Terrible. No malware / trackers / ad blocking on 9999.
I hope at least they'll keep these options in their tunnel configuration but if not there's not much sense in keeping their service....
I'm always wondering whether those centralized privacy services are not the easiest first target for three-letter-agencies to infiltrate to gain access to the most relevant users to track - and what currently would prevent them from doing so if they haven't already ? Maybe, as with the case of many TOR nodes , they might be running them.
I don't think there's any company with useful information on the American public that isn't being forced to regularly hand over that data. That's probably been true to some extent for a long time (see Room 641A) but it's certainly gotten worse. At this point you can't check out a book from the library without the feds demanding that your librarian turn over a list of everything you've ever read, or rent a hotel room for a night without the hotel being forced to provide your information to the government.
Use an online service that's new enough and small enough and it might not be compromised, but the moment it gets popular men with guns and national security letters with gag orders will show up to install hardware on their prem, take over entire offices, or just demand reports.
VPNs and secure DNS services aren't there to keep your data from the NSA, ICE, or even the police. They are useful for keeping your ISP from selling your browsing history to anyone willing to pay them (https://www.mitnicksecurity.com/in-the-news/republicans-just...). It'll help keep a little of what you do online away from data brokers, keep your ISP from sending you DMCA notices, and not much else.
For clarification, this is completely true of the US, without needing to speculate, thanks to a combination of FISA 702, the ECPA, CALEA, EO 12333, and the CLOUD act. It all has legal footing in the States.
However, it's not at all the reality of a vast swath of other countries (or, at least, not yet; see Chat Control v2). The US is particularly foul (and effective) when it comes to this practice, but anything outside of US jurisdiction that doesn't have an office in the US can't be touched by laws like these, and the laws of most other countries tend to be significantly less invasive than American ones when it comes to data interception and the practices surrounding it.
1 reply →
> and what currently would prevent them from doing so if they haven't already
they arent gods. some people actually have moral standards and dont just do whatever a foreign agency wants them to do
Adversaries don't always ask nicely. Sometimes they break in and silently take the data. These services centralize traffic flows and make it so that an adversary only needs to tap one or two circuits to get a full picture for all users of a service.
11 replies →
Quad9 is a reasonable choice given the stance on privacy and the similar jurisdiction (Mullvad would probably face the same takedown orders as Quad9), but really anyone who cares about bypassing national blocking orders should run a local caching recursive resolver. Unbound is a great choice.
Unbound can also be used to block malware and advertising domains using shared public lists, or you can build your own list. Your resolver’s DNS queries could be piped through Mullvad or Tor if you want additional privacy.
I don’t honestly see how that’s necessarily better. Now your ISP can tap your individual household to see what’s being queried. Whereas if you use Do[THU] to connect to some remote recursive resolver it practically functions as a mixer.
That’s why I suggested routing queries through a VPN or Tor if that’s a concern. This bypasses centralized DNS services that may face national blocking orders while retaining privacy.
7 replies →
[dead]
This feels like a nitpick but it's important to mention anyway
> Mullvad Browser uses them [ the DoH servers ] by default when you're not on Mullvad VPN, preventing your ISP from seeing the domains you visit.
This is a half-truth until Encrypted Client Hello (ECH) is in-use for most of your traffic. Sure, you won't have clear-text DNS floating out there in the series of tubes. However, without ECH the hostname you're connecting to is exposed in the SNI field during TLS handshakes.
I imagine most sites we are browsing will eventually be able to leverage ECH, so this should become less of an issue over time, but in the event you frequent any self-hosted operations (e.g. no Cloudflare or similar), encrypted client hello could still reveal identifying information since it requires still exposing an "outer SNI" that a valid certificate needs to be presented for. You only get to easily hide in with the masses when you use a big infrastructure provider as a consequence, since the common outer SNI of cloudflare-ech.com doesn't really reveal anything different than an IP <-> ASN database would. But if the outer SNI is "dunder-cat-enterprises.com", then all I've protected you from is your ISP snooping on the subdomain or pinpointing exactly which one of my domains you might be talking to.
Even ECH isn't that helpful. ISP still sees the IP addresses you connect to. Even when non-dedicated IPs are used, I'd be surprised if a quite basic traffic analysis (say, bytes transferred on first visit) wouldn't identify the domain.
VPN providers at the tier of Mullvad should be precise about this stuff -- I think it's more than just a nitpick, considering the audience. oh god did I just use an emdash.
Note that you need some flavor of secure DNS to enforce ECH. The protocol is designed to be downgradable.
It's not that I don't trust Quad9 or dns.sb or any of the others, it's just that I trust Mullvad more.
Sad to see this going away, but I assume this is so Mullvad can focus on their primary services.
For awhile I self-hosted adguard dns server. It supports iphone profiles thus forcing iOS DNS. I eventually disabled it due to timeout issues specific to iOS. Issue was something DNSSEC related.
While reproing the issue I noted the average recursor round trip time from my OVH server hosted in Oregon to the default upstream DNS - Quad9 - was around 70ms. When I changed it to Hurricane Electric the roundtrip dropped to a steady 20ms. Later I changed it again to Cloudflare and the roundtrip was a consistent 2 to 3ms.
Hi - I'm with Quad9 (CTO). I'm going to try to put together a single post replying to some of these topics.
First: We welcome the Mullvad users who will be shifted onto our systems, and we appreciate that Mullvad contacted us instead of doing this unilaterally. Since we have no signup process, they could have just moved users across but we very much appreciate their cooperation and communication, both with us and with the users of the service - this is exactly how an ideal transfer should go, at least from our perspective.
I'll try to make some short summaries of some of the points here, and a reply on each.
"You should just run your own DNS server - it's easy." - Yes, we agree that for a small company or home running your own recursive resolver is a reasonable solution. You probably won't get the threat mitigation depth of service that Quad9 offers, but you may not want that. Privacy also suffers a bit, since it's still the same IP address (your home "public" address) sending queries to authoritative servers, probably unencrypted. A good middle compromise is to run PiHole or AdGuard software, and forward your queries to Quad9 via an encrypted connection. (see below) This mixes your queries in with a large number of other users, and gets the potential improvements of having a much larger active cache nearby which will have "hot" answers. Running a home resolver for yourself or even a few dozen (or even a few hundred) people is not difficult. But with all services, things change with scale. As the query volume and number of locations grow, you soon find yourself hitting all possible exception cases, instantly. Many millions of requests a second requires a lot of time, expertise, and money to ensure nearly 100% uptime. We are admittedly quite a small group - less than 10 full time - but even that is under-staffed for supporting more than 100 million daily users. We do quite a bit with a very small resource set, and I doubt it could be done less expensively with the same robustness for the same scale. Again, we appreciate Mullvad's sponsorship to help keep this expanding at our normal weekly growth rate of around 2%.
"I want ad blocking, and Quad9 doesn't do that" - Correct, Quad9 does not do ad blocking at this time. There are good solutions like PiHole or AdGuard extensions that provide this functionality, and getting local control and logging of your DNS queries is probably useful for power users. There are also commercial platforms that provide this capability, and they may provide significantly more "knobs" for what you want to block. Quad9 is a non-profit - we're not out to corner the market, and as long as privacy and security is increased for the end user, we're all for commercial solutions!
"Quad9 blocks domains in Germany" - Currently there are no mandatory blocks that Quad9 is integrating or enforcing on our DNS platform, from any external party. We did briefly block some domains as a result of legal actions against us in Germany. The good news is that we won that case in Germany, after two years and three appeals and an enormous amount of time and money (which despite Germany's "loser pays" rule, is not even close to expenditures.) https://quad9.net/news/blog/quad9-turns-the-sony-case-around... The bad news is that the identical thing is happening now in France where we have a number of legal cases open against Quad9, and we do not see an end to this any time soon as long as there is an open question in the EU about what a content-neutral intermediary is and is not required to do.
"Mullvad exiting creates more centralization, and that is bad." On the fact that centralization is bad, we agree. DNS resolver centralization is not a great thing, and it seems to be trending in the wrong direction. It's not just large public resolvers - consolidation in the ISP industry is causing more and more of the world's internet-using population to utilize a smaller number of recursive servers. Those servers are operated (mostly) by law-abiding companies, and so there is a strong interest by various parties interested in control of content to "put a hand on the available throat" even though it's the wrong throat to choke. We're busy with some ideas of how to solve this, both from a legal defense position as well as a technology position - stay tuned in the coming months. In the meantime, you can contribute a few euros/francs/dollars to us and we'll have more funds to pay for legal defense in France and hopefully up to the EU courts. https://quad9.net/donate/
"Government agencies can tap data" - Quad9 is based in Switzerland. Despite what may be common knowledge from movies, there is a very formal and rigorous process for governments (Swiss or non-Swiss) to demand data. It is (ultimately) transparent, and managed in a way that is quite well structured - this is, after all, what the Swiss have been doing with financial data for many years. More importantly: Quad9 stores no user data about queries. There isn't anything to demand - the box of data is quite empty. Because of this technological decision and our wide announcement of it (https://quad9.net/about/transparency-report/) we have never received a request for data. As for technological methods: Quad9 operates in 200+ widely-separated locations, with no backbone or central data transport network - it is intentionally 'islanded'. It would be a significant challenge to intercept data at all those locations, though we're certain that there are many queries that are observed due to their presence on various ISP or cable networks which are under surveillance. We support all major DNS encryption methods today (even the two that run on QUIC - HTTP/3 and DOQ) and we encourage users to use one of those for their communications to us. We are also one of the few major resolvers experimenting with ADOx, which encrypts messages between the recursive resolver and authoritative server. (https://dnsprivacy.org/adox_status_and_deployment/)
> On the fact that centralization is bad, we agree. DNS resolver centralization is not a great thing, and it seems to be trending in the wrong direction.
It seems all too similar to the degradation of peer-to-peer networks where nodes are replaced by few supernodes. You mentioned a couple reasons yourself: consolidation and legal pressure. Add to this the technical qualification aspect and time investment (Mullvad's position), and the financial cost of sustaining such a non-profit project. Suddenly there are very few people or even organizations worldwide, who can bear the burden.
Thank you for existing and your tireless work.
> Quad9 is based in Switzerland. Despite what may be common knowledge from movies, there is a very formal and rigorous process for governments (Swiss or non-Swiss) to demand data.
Due to Lugano Convention [0] / Budapest Convention [1] / Hague Convention etc, I don't see how Switzerland is any more insulated than, say, Norway is (both these countries are part of EFTA & signatories to various UN/EU/EFTA treaties). Per this article [2], Switzerland ranks below Ireland, Portugal, Denmark, France in Data privacy laws (in fact, it ranks the same as the UK).
If I am being honest, at this point, "based in Switzerland" (or Cyprus or Sweden or Gibraltar) comes across as marketing gimmick VPN companies are notorious for.
[0] EU civil & commercial law enforcement in Switzerland: https://www.legal500.com/guides/chapter/switzerland-enforcem...
[1] Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) is bypassed: https://rm.coe.int/16802e726c
[2] https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/surveillance-st...
Our goal is not "insulation" as much as it is "transparency." Governments that do not adhere to legal frameworks like the ones you reference above are also governments that have inconsistent or easily-changed legal structures - we are not hiding in some obscure and possibly unstable nation that ignores international standards. Our jurisdictional choice of Switzerland is the opposite of that. Switzerland has a strong history of making legal enforcement events transparent, with processes that follow expected process. We cannot avoid following the law, nor is that our goal.
Swiss data privacy law is also much more strict on us, which "puts our money where out mouth is" as the saying goes. Violating privacy laws in Switzerland may result in criminal penalties, not simply civil penalties - jail time, rather than just fines.
Thanks for this! I was looking at your transparency report (https://quad9.net/about/transparency-report/) and I notice 2026 is not included in the 'list of years in which we have not received a request for data', despite the list being updated quarterly according to the text below it. When I saw the page earlier, I assumed that either the list isn't actually updated quarterly, or I'd discovered an exciting example of a warrant canary.
No, canaries in our opinion are not a particularly good idea for a variety of reasons. We have not received any requests/demands for information in 2026 - we'll try to update the page to reflect that this is no longer a quarterly update.
I saw your response about not blocking ads currently. What about blocking adult content, for a child's computer? Mullvad had such an option[1] under family.dns.mullvad.net. Very useful!
[1]https://mullvad.net/en/help/dns-over-https-and-dns-over-tls
This is an area that is fraught with challenges. Serving a truly global audience means standards are difficult to measure as to what is "adult content" - it varies widely (Wikipedia in some areas is "adult content", as an example.)
In the near term, there is no filter set that we offer that mimics that functionality.
However, we recognize some variation of "best effort" adult content segmentation is a useful filter to have. We're considering it in the near term, as we have some specific educational institutional pressure to try to meet as well, since students are often easy targets for phishing, classroom computers are rife with malware, and there is also the problem of inappropriate DNS-based profiling of students and schools - problems that Quad9 can help solve.
1 reply →
Thanks for the clarification, I mistakenly assumed you were also required to block sanctioned media (mostly Russian/Iranian), but upon further research apparently that only applies to ISP DNS.
You are probably the guy to ask. I have always found dns over TLS to be the fastest, but with the quic versions making an entrance, maybe things have changed. Which is the one that gives me the fastest replies?
We actually quite like DOQ and DOH3, both of which use QUIC.
All modern Apple systems use QUIC. For instance if given 9.9.9.9 via DHCP they will automatically upgrade to encryption via DDR, then then upgrade to DOH3 with no intervention by the end user. We find that encryption load is lower with QUIC-based transports, but we need to really get a formal research paper together on that "in our spare time."
Faster? Probably, but is it measurably "better" remains a question for others to answer. Due to parallelism in most query sets, minor wins with DNS latency matter less than you might think.
Not OP but I don’t think DoQ is very interesting. DoH is nice because it blends in with HTTPS. Both do the protocol level things to avoid connection handshakes. The HTTP overhead isn’t that much really.
DoT is more complex than you’d imagine because it has to try hard to implement its own solutions to avoid handshakes.
I'm not saying this is a canary, but I think it should be treated as such.
Does anyone know of good alternatives that also block ads? Seems Quad9 doesn't.
NextDNS https://nextdns.io/
Been using them for years. The price is reasonable too. It’s the only way I found to block ads everywhere on iOS (except the YT app, Mullvad’s Albania wireguard did that)
1 reply →
https://controld.com/free-dns
https://joindns4.eu/for-public#resolver-options
they block duolingo
1 reply →
nextdns.io might be an option
https://adguard-dns.io/kb/general/dns-providers/ have a list of options that some of them have ad blocker
https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdGuardHome/releases
Trivial to self-host, and gives you full control of blocking.
Several (European) alternatives are available: https://eualternative.eu/categories/public-dns/
Since this seems to be the thread for public DoH providers, this article is probably worth mentioning (it can sort by DoH, DoT, DoQ, etc support).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_recursive_name_server
I'm using numa(https://github.com/razvandimescu/numa) for ad filtering and odoh mode for privacy (shameless plug)
So this is something to use instead of pihole?
I have a router with adguard on it so I can locally filter everything.
Sometimes you need to unblock things to ensure something works properly, so having it be local is better in my opinion.
dot.sb
dns.adguard-dns.com
What about Cloudflare’s public DNS? https://developers.cloudflare.com/1.1.1.1/setup/#1111-for-fa...
Cloudflare DNS does not block ads, it only blocks malware
1 reply →
These was one of the fastest DoH services for pipelined queries over single TCP connection
IME, it was much faster than Quad9 for this purpose
First Mullvad shuts down its Google search proxy
Now its DoH service
What's next
They lost me as a customer when they got rid of port forwarding, which is nice to have on the high seas
I stopped using Mullvad when they discontinued OpenVPN support (another one to add to the parent list). OpenVPN, if nothing else, provides a wider array of connection options that have a better chance of fulfilling your specific network needs. It supports both UDP and TCP, unlike WireGuard.
I say this respectfully, but Mullvad is perhaps “dumbing down” their VPN service in an effort to simplify their operations and cater to a wider and more general audience.
Curious what alternative you found as a replacement. Could you share?
6 replies →
> is nice to have on the high seas
For sailing the high seas, or for harboring? I, for one, am glad to not have Mullvad's IP ranges blacklisted everywhere.
I've found DoH was pretty unusable for me on Windows because the TCP connection doesn't seem to stay open between queries. No idea if it's a software or network issue, but big unpredictable delays on DNS queries broke all kinds of weird unexpected stuff.
NB. I don't use Windows and I don't use "Private DNS". I'm referring to using HTTP/1.1 pipelining^1 with a TCP client plus TLS forward proxy or HTTP/2 with an ldns-based client to fetch DNS data in bulk, outside the browser, from the command line. I got some incredible speeds from Mullvad
1. Not every service still supports 1.1, RFC recommends H2
Also had a ChatGPT alternative with less surveillance
Discontinued
The old heads out there might remember a time when, rather than everyone using one service provider (ex. for Linux binaries/source), we all mutually agreed to use independently run mirrors closer to us. We sort of had to because of bandwidth and latency limits. But it meant that there were a thousand different people providing the same service. Impossible to censor everyone, everyone shares the load, too many places to hack if you wanted to massively compromise, and the users won.
DNS is harder to do that way because it's hard to have limits on DNS. Perhaps DNS could be adapted with QUIC, to allow fast, encrypted DNS that's easier to rate-limit, and then it'd be easier for average people to run public mirrors with limits.
What does everybody here think about Daniel Berntsson, founder and co-owner of Mullvad, personally donating 5 million Swedish krona to the populist Örebro party, criticized for its stances on race & immigration?
I'm not trying to start an unhealthy discussion about this topic, genuinely curious about your opinion on the matter.
Irrespective of political affiliations, I felt that Mullvad addressed the outrage in a mature and non culture war manner. Because of how they handled the situation, I have a lot more respect for the company.
It's great that they didn't try to cancel the guy or get seduced into driving a wedge into their team. It is great they chose their principle over pleasing the crowd in such a transparent way.
I have been a customer for many years. I once even used the cash payment option out of curiosity.
Here is their statement:
https://mullvad.net/en/blog/donation-controversy
They even linked his (Swedish language) private blog on which he wrote on the issue:
https://dberntsson.info/
I stopped paying for or using Mullvad because of that. I have no intention of funding more nazis, when I can help it
I have no insights in Swedish politics. His actions could be really bad, or mean nothing at all. Without proper context, it’s hard to say.
He is in his full right to support whatever party he wants?
Those parties exists for a reason, a response to certain pressures. Nothing happens in isolation. If you zoom out a bit and if you can for a second try to empathize with both sides, you will often find that both sides of an issue is correct, reasonable & rational from their own perspectives. It is often more an emotional response than one of pure survival.
The more you force things on people or suppress them, the more they will resist & push back. The rise of the far-right is not random or just pure evil manifesting out of thin air. It is like a acute inflammatory/immune system response. Obviously it can be exploited by bad actors to further inflame/divide & accelerate certain agendas. Often times extremism takes hold when certain justices are denied (which is in fact evil).
Life is best if you assume the guy on the other side (90% of a group) is just a bro trying to survive & have no real bad intent towards you, they don't know you or have been in your shoes, and the other way around too. Thus it is very important to become non-reactive, become observant who is trying to stoke the flames, who benefits from the chaos and so on.
I compared pings recently and was getting like 200-300ms to the closest mullvad DoH server. Quad9 has an adblocking DoH DNS with decent latency.
I used to use Mullvad's DoH Service because of ad blocking, it worked quite well with SoundCloud etc.
Are there any alternatives?
This obviously isn't for everyone, but the solution I use is: my own DNS server at home + wg to access it when I'm away.
I was considering setting something similar with Tailscale, I have a TS exitnode that sits on a VM alongside my VyOS/home router.
I'd tempted to setup a DNS Forwarder up on that with Ad-Blocking then use Quad9 as upstream, then just have Tailscale be always on.
How's the latency when you're away?
nextdns. I wonder why people use anything else at all
Quad9 has horrible latency and frequent query failures, I hope Mullvad encourages them to improve their routes
Their DoH going down for hours multiple times is what forced me back to cloudflare, i don't trust cloudflare more but at least it works consistently.
Additionally the default of blocking 'malware' doesn't jive with uncensored internet - that should be an opt in and not a default on their flagship address if they want to be taken seriously as unfiltered provider.
If the encrypted endpoint can go down for extended periods and they curate list of 'malware' they are not something that should be considered a gateway to uncensored and open internet.
I frequently get mini failures with quad9 and my DNS client is too dumb to retry with another server (or quad9 returns a valid but bogus response that prevents my client from hoping to the next server) so I had to ditch quad9.
Quad9 also has worse latency but I could live with it, I just can't live with web pages failing to load several times per day(especially hacker News that has their DNS TTL set to 1 second)
It doesn't happen with my ISP's servers nor with CloudFlare or google or even good ol' L3.
The announcement only mentions DoH and not DoT... I guess both are going away?
Apologies for political commentary, but I just say this in drew defaults blog:
“ Daniel Berntsson
Known for: Mullvad VPN (co-founder, co-owner)
Daniel is the co-founder of Mullvad VPN, alongside Fredrik Strömberg. In June 2026, Daniel donated 5M Swedish Krona (~$500,000 USD) to the populist anti-immigration Örebro Party,[source] saying “it’s sad that it’s needed”. The party supports the ethnic cleansing of non-white people from Sweden, and Daniel’s donation represented, at the time, 72% of the party’s revenue. Daniel cited immigration as a motivating factor for his donation.”
disappointing, because alternatives matter too. quad9 and other well known servers are potentially blocked by some countries, so the more lesser known services there are the better.
There is always the option of running your own locally.
This is probably service you can host locally with the lowest maintenance and hardware requirements so it isn't even a hassle to do it yourself.
if i live in a country where DNS is filtered then running my own locally is not going to work.
Mullvad talks a lot about decentralization, then hands its resolver users to one of the biggest resolvers going. Quad9 is a good operator, and they actually fought Sony in German court instead of quietly complying. They still got ordered to block. That's the problem. A blocking order only hurts as much as the resolver it lands on is used, so every operator that shuts down and sends its users to Quad9 makes the next order a better deal for whoever files it.
exactly. and those servers are also easily blocked because they are known publicly. i see this problem right now. 4 out of 5 providers that i tried are not working from where i am
That's a shame, even if I remember their DNS service being a bit unstable (it would at various points not be able to resolve or flat out it was down).
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
[dead]
[flagged]
Pretty unapologetically, too. He's still doing it and will keep doing it the more you give him money.
Source?
Translation: one of Mullvad’s two cofounders has donated money to Örebropartiet, a left-leaning Swedish political party that promotes strict and restrictive immigration laws.
7 replies →
[flagged]
They are not far right, AFAICT they are “right” Marxists, probably most similar to Albanian Hoxhaism.
If you aren’t familiar with splits inside Marxism-Leninism, the “left” is most often represented by Trotskyism with the “right” tendency being more like Stalinism and North Korean Juche. (Note that these left/right terms aren’t universally used or applied because every faction claims to be correct.)
10 replies →
> Running a privacy-focused public DNS service is a highly specialized undertaking
This seems like an overstatement: I have been running my own recursive DNS with Unbound for years and never thought it was a "highly specialized undertaking." It took perhaps a couple of hours to set up in the pre-AI age. I filter ads and trackers using an aggressive blacklist[0].
[0] https://github.com/hagezi/dns-blocklists
You can't compare running a single service in your home network with the operations it takes to serve a public DNS
>https://freedns.afraid.org/
This dude has been doing it for 25 years, and actually this is a dns provider for domain names which I'm decently sure makes it more complicated than public dns.
They're allowed to say they don't want to pay for it anymore, I just think their logic is bad. Or maybe their lawyer said they're running risks just ignoring takedown and they didn't want to deal with it anymore.
2 replies →
This is a scaling problem, not an intrinsic difficulty. Mullvad already had the infrastructure in place. I suspect the real reason is cost-cutting.
2 replies →
How much traffic is your public DNS serving?