[X-Istence]

Not resolving 127.0.0.1 or RFC1918 addresses or even ULA for IPv6 is done to avoid DNS rebinding attacks. For most end users that is probably the correct move.

[lxgr]

My home router even seems to inspect any UDP/53 traffic and redact any responses containing local/private A entries, so not even switching to a public resolver bypasses the protection.

I agree that it’s usually the right behavior.

[cj]

Interesting. I hadn’t considered it might be a security feature of his router!

[lxgr]

In case you want to look into it further: My router actually allows adding exemptions to this policy on a per-hostname basis!

Sometimes I wish it would allow wildcards, but honestly that's probably just another way for users to shoot themselves in the foot (e.g. by adding '*').

[RulerOf]

> Sometimes I wish it would allow wildcards

pfSense for example uses unbound, and while it doesn't have a switch for disabling rebind protection, it does allow injecting arbitrary unbound config, which can disable rebind protection for any depth of a DNS zone or IP space. E.g.:

    server:
    private-address: 192.168.0.1/24
    private-domain: plex.direct