Re: OpenDNS safer or not?



Barry Margolin wrote:


I was using the term to refer to security software in general. How
about the options in many browsers to block phishing sites?


This is, of course, bullshit as well.

The point is that most users don't want to keep track of malware,
phishing, etc.


Then tell'em don't install any, and to simply not fall for phishing. Now
that's really easy...

-- they WANT to delegate that responsibility to someone else.


And why should we care? The fact is that, how much they might want it
either, they simply can't delegate responsibility, especially not for if the
cause is their utter idiocy.

This implies that they trust that third party to act responsibly.

So, and has OpenDNS claimed to be responsible or even reliable?

It's like hiring a security guard. This presumably makes things MORE
secure.


A security guard is competent on his field and is getting paid to do the job
as you intend it. And a security guard doesn't require you to remove other
security measures like the front door. Now so much to your failed analogy.

you can't watch the front door yourself and also get your real work done.


That's why we LOCK the front door. Now will you please stop trying to kid
me? Nothing of this will change that OpenDNS deliberately introduces wrong
DNS replies for whatsoever reasons, adds non-ICANN TLDs, create a new
incomptabile root zone without any authority, breaks any authority chains
anyway (no chance for root-delegation), and much more.

It's a wonder that this POS even works, but it's no wonder that some people
actually like this POS, becaus eit shows their lack of competence, knowledge
and probably sanity.

At any rate, you're even worse off than with your ISP's caching DNS server
or the ICANN root.
.