[zaarn]

Google is the business of displaying ads by means of collecting data to form a profile.

Cloudflare is in the business of running websites really fast and subsidize a free offering through paying customers.

Which of those has a conflict of interest in running a DNS server while promising to protect privacy?

[codedokode]

Running websites and selling users' data brings you more profit than just running websites. With DNS Cloudflare can also learn what non-Cloudflare websites users are visiting and when.

[zaarn]

Why would cloudflare do that? It's not in their business model and "it makes more money" is hardly a thing that motivates corporations all the time, otherwise google and facebook would be offering subscription services at 20$/year to get ad- and track-free.

Why would cloudflare even want to know what websites you visit? They don't operate an adnetwork, they operate a CDN. At best they could use it to pre-cache websites in regions before demand rises. But they can already do that without DNS...

[codedokode]

> "it makes more money" is hardly a thing that motivates corporations all the time

Really? The primary purpose of any corporation is earning as much money as possible.

[zaarn]

Okay, let's do it by having an analog.

You are given advice on how to safely cross a four-way intersection by two companies.

One is an insurance company specialised in people being run over by semi trucks at four way intersections.

The other is a contractor that designs, builds and maintains four way intersections for the government and private entities.

Of course, yes, the later could collude with the former to make extra money.

But it's also not their business model. They build intersections, people pay them to make those safe and reliable. People do not pay them to collude with shady insurance companies which try to kill people by semi truck.

People would actively not pay them if they did that.

Same with Cloudflare. If CF sold data to ad networks, a lot of websites would simply jump ship and use one of the other CDNs with free offerings. People pay CF a shitload of money for ensuring the connection is private and safe (notably banks, governments, etc.)

[craftyguy]

Your analogy is bad because it describes behavior which is illegal. If you want to make as much money as possible, you might avoid decisions like the one you present which will cost you more money when it is exposed.

[zaarn]

It's not a bad analogy because it's illegal, it's a good analogy because it leads to people understanding what is happening here by simplifying in something people encounter regularly and understand somewhat.

[freeopinion]

See recent behavior of Wells Fargo before you dismiss this. They have built the largest consumer bank on practices that were not legal. Even after some of those practices have been exposed they are #1. Millions of people with multiple semi-truck tire marks on their bodies still bank with them.

[h1d]

It doesn't mean, take the shortest route toward the stack of money in sight.

If CloudFlare started selling DNS info when they have emphasized that their DNS service is caring for privacy, people apparently stop using their resolver and given the impression that they can lie, it can also hurt their main business.