|
|
|
|
|
by tialaramex
481 days ago
|
|
The reason browsers didn't implement DANE is because most people's DNS servers are garbage, so if you do this the browser doesn't work and "if you changed last you own the problem". At the time if you asked a typical DNS server e.g. at an ISP or built into a cheap home router - any type of question except "A? some.web.site.example" you get either no answer or a confused error. What do you mean records other than A exist? RFC what? These days most of them can also answer AAAA? but good luck for the records needed by DNSSEC. Today we could do better where people have any sort of DNS privacy, whether that's over HTTPS or TLS or QUIC so long as it's encrypted it's probably not garbage and it isn't being intercepted by garbage at your ISP. Once the non-adoption due to rusted-in-place infrastructure happened, you get (as you will probably see here on HN) people who have some imagined principle reasons not to do DNSSEC, remember always to ask them how their solution fixed the problem that they say DNSSEC hasn't fixed. The fact the problem still isn't fixed tells you everything you need to know. |
|
Really? Because that would mean that anything using SRV records wouldn’t work on home routers, yet it’s an integral part of many protocols at this point.
There’s some room between “my DNS resolver doesn’t do DNSSEC” and “I can only resolve A records”.