Comment by OptionOfT

Comment by OptionOfT 3 days ago

27 replies

Honestly, I'm fine with that. Applications themselves should not be resolving DNS outside of what I set in settings.

The reasons applications do this is to prevent users from blocking telemetry etc. It's my computer, I should have final say on what goes out.

amluto 3 days ago

There is no such thing as a remotely cross-platform DNS resolution API that has the system do the lookup and does not utterly suck for asynchronous use.

  • wtallis 3 days ago

    I suspect "cross-platform" is doing a lot of heavy lifting for your claim. Browser engines and application frameworks built on top of them have no trouble using platform-specific APIs under the hood.

    • spookie 2 days ago

      Yeah, but frameworks are yet another level of abstraction and dependency that just kills momentum.

  • [removed] 3 days ago
    [deleted]
nullindividual 3 days ago

All major browsers now implement the ability to use a browser-defined resolver.

  • lxgr 2 days ago

    Yes, and some of them even make it the default under some circumstances.

    I agree with GP that this is generally not a great trend.

Dalewyn 3 days ago

Seeing this getting downvoted is fucking wild.

I remember 20+ years ago when one of the most commonly seen attacks was malware configuring a proxy server in Internet Explorer which by design overrode the operating system's configuration.

What a lot of software does today by ignoring the operating system in lieu of their own shit is just like the above. If your program doesn't (or can't) respect the operating system, your shit is malware and you should reconsider who you write code for.

  • nomel 2 days ago

    > Seeing this getting downvoted is fucking wild.

    If you consider the source of income of what's most likely a considerable portion of the HN community, I think this makes more sense. Apple is one of the only companies interested in preventing tracking, and it hurts, in the billions sort of way [1][2].

    [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/kateoflahertyuk/2022/10/08/appl...

    [2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/timbajarin/2022/07/26/apples-do...

  • yndoendo 3 days ago

    Those ideas are not isomorphic.

    One malicious overrides universal network communication while the other just conducts DNS queries limited to a single application domain.

    • altruios 3 days ago

      You are describing something that violates system setting for it's own benefit instead of the end user.

      You are describing malware. Benign malware is still malicious, even if it does no active harm. Intent (of how the software operates) matters.

    • Dalewyn 3 days ago

      >just conducts DNS queries

      Queries that will ignore configurations you set.

      If I see something ignoring/evading my configured DNS server, that shit is fucking malware.

      • fmajid 3 days ago

        At some point in my copious spare time, I plan on writing software to allowlist in my firewall outbound connections only to IPs resolved using my DNS servers.

      • mrkstu 3 days ago

        Have fun troubleshooting Java apps w/their own cert stores...

        • kergonath 2 days ago

          I am fine with the only Java application I have used in the lease decade not working. I did not even bother putting a JVM on any of the OS I installed in the last 5 years. So yeah, I’d rather have fewer security holes.

nox101 3 days ago

I have one browser setup to do DNS differently than another. I don't want to have to set it at a system level and then need multiple systems just to run 2 browsers with different DNS lookup

Spivak 3 days ago

Yep, I wish they would go the full way and block socket access entirely so your own outgoing traffic is always introspectable even with cert pinning. It would make it blatantly obvious when apps try shady shit.

  • nomel 2 days ago

    I had a great Windows firewall like this about 20 years ago. It would pop up a dialog for every network request from an app. You could block or allow based on port or destination, or "block all". It was amazing, because as you say, it made it very obvious when an app was trying shady shit.

    I would love to have that back, but I was never able to find a firewall so hostile to the user experience of the general population.

    • kergonath 2 days ago

      It sounds similar in spirit to Little Snitch, mentioned in the article (on macOS, but which inspired OpenSnitch, which runs on Linux). It is awesome indeed, if a bit overwhelming at first. Most regular users would just uninstall it to avoid the constant barrage of requests initially, and then every time a new piece of software tries to connect to anything.

  • newaccount74 3 days ago

    Shady shit? Not every network request is a call to an HTTP REST API.

    Blocking socket APIs would break every app that supports other protocols. Goodbye file transfer apps, VPN apps, file sync apps, database tools, SSH clients, remote desktop clients, audio and video conferencing apps, etc.

    • 9dev 3 days ago

      As long as I can add exceptions for those apps to my firewall, I’m kind of… okay with that?

    • Spivak 3 days ago

      Shady shit meaning really obvious when you're making http calls with encrypted opaque blobs.