@rootwyrm @jpmens This is of course absurd.

1) DoT has almost the same properties (but people keep FUDing about DoH only)

2) malware can implement its own name resolution system, whether or not DoH exists.

3) As long as there are networks which block port 53 and force going through their resolver, we'll need DoT and DoH.

@bortzmeyer @jpmens
1) Oh, DoT is it's whole own OTHER topic. With lots of 'srsly?!' But >95% of users don't know what a DNS server *is*. But they know DoH from Mozilla and NaziFlare marketing.

2) So your stance is that a piece of software which bypasses user *and* administrator control in order to surveil or upload data is not malicious?
Example: Firefox defaults!

3) If you have the capability to block 53 and 853, you can just as easily block DoH. DoH is ineffective for fascist bypass.