On Sun, 30 Mar 2025 15:43:02 +0200
Didier Kryn <kryn@???> wrote:

> Le 30/03/2025 à 14:18, Steve Litt a écrit :
> >>     Good to know, but, for the moment I don't consider yet it
> >> deserves
> >> the burden to install and maintain my own DNS
> > All unbound does is pass your dns queries up the chain. It's not
> > authoritative. It's very, very simple, and solves the kinds of problems
> > discussed in this thread.
>
>     So what is it that you want to achieve? I bet the ISP's DNS is just
> refering to the very same root DNS as unbound is. So you guys what do
> you suspect your ISP's DNS is doing?

You can choose which queries to block and which to forward;
You can bundle all queries from your home network so that is more difficult to profile who connected where;
The ISP's dns is very interested in your queries because most of the time
they offer you also a email address for free where they can send you all kinds
of advertising, the root DNS may not be so much interested in that.

>     The only thing which makes sense to me is the possibility to block
> or divert the javascript requests to the AD servers and to cloudfront.

Disable javascript?

> But I'm not sure it would work to barely block all that shit. The AD

You will never be able to block all that shit, but I can tell
it does a rather big difference when I read a newspaper
web site with this rustical adblocking (through /etc/hosts and unbound)
or without it.

Ciao,
Tito

> industry is not that stupid. Already they know when you switch to
> another window and wait untill the scope in on the proper window to
> deliver their ADs; they know when you turn the sound off, so that you
> need to lower it to a inaudible level instead.
>
>     A better approach is to be implemented inside the web browser: let
> the AD machinery believe you watch it all but actually divert all the
> junk. The Duckduckgo browser on Android does this kind of thing, though
> it still displays a blank space in the place of ADs; so it's possible. I
> don't expect Firefox to implement this because they seem tied to Google,
> but maybe others like Palemoon.
>
> --     Didier
>
>