Show HN: Running the second public ODoH relay

(numa.rs)

86 points | by rdme 5 hours ago ago

26 comments

  • Bender an hour ago ago

    To me this feels like turtles all the way down. Ultimately who owns and controls the layer-4 proxies and DoH servers matters and can easily get into turtle arguments. Who controls the certs controls the mathematical obfuscation (encryption) also matters. Pieces of the puzzle can be shared and recombined at any time.

    Me personally, I will stick with running my own DoH servers and thus I need not run any turtles (layer 4 proxies) in the middle of my already encrypted connections. Anyone running Unbound DNS can enable DoH if Unbound was built including '--with-libnghttp2' which the Alpine Linux version has. At the moment my browser is talking to Unbound over DoH on my local network so I get the advantages of ECN but I can easily switch it to any server where I have installed Unbound. Ultimately DNS at some point will be unencrypted UDP port 53 so I would rather it be me that determines where that happens so I can optimize my own cache and pre-cache cron jobs to mask my DNS behavior, but that's just me. Others can do whatever they want, as they should. The people that operate my ISP are bigger deviants than I and they know that I know that they know that I know this.

    Oh and as a funny side note, I can warm up cache on entirely unrelated nodes and then transfer the cache export to any node and keep it valid on that node as long as I wish making the vast majority of my DNS requests respond in less than 700 nanoseconds not that I am in any hurry.

        unbound-control dump_cache | bzip -9c > /dev/shm/dump_node_1045.txt.bz2
    
    I can then bring those cache dumps in from any node to my home network making DNS resolution entirely invisible. Automation is only limited to ones imagination. Or AI's imagination. I personally find it beneficial to listen to Pure Imagination from Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory (1971) RIP Gene Wilder
  • binyang_qiu 36 minutes ago ago

    Pretty cool to see someone actually running public ODoH infra instead of just talking about privacy in theory. I'm just wondering what the biggest operational pain has been so far running a public relay.

  • cedws 4 hours ago ago

    What’s the selling point of ODoH given the low uptake of ECH which means the name of the server you’re talking to is given away anyway?

    • aftbit an hour ago ago

      What's the selling point of locking your front door given that you have an easily breakable window nearby?

    • jeroenhd 3 hours ago ago

      It means you can use a decently fast DNS server like Cloudflare without the major privacy problems of using Cloudflare. Or DNS4EU, or any non-ISP DNS server really.

      Your ISP snooping on you with SNI logging is something people using normal ISPs don't need to worry about, but feeding all your data into a profit-driven company is.

      • LoganDark 3 hours ago ago

        > something people using normal ISPs don't need to worry about

        It doesn't matter which ISP you're using if the cables are tapped, which they pretty much are.

        • UqWBcuFx6NV4r 2 hours ago ago

          Please don’t be intentionally tone-deaf. “a nation-state can track my shit therefore it’s not with doing” is a silly, silly, silly approach to security, and does not speak to the concerns of the vast majority of even privacy-focused people.

    • elp 3 hours ago ago

      My, admittedly cynical, view of it is that the main selling point is that you share your data with the person running the ODoH server.

      The truth is that very very few people run their own recursive nameserver. The entirely reasonable assumption for any authoritative nameserver, like .com, is that the query is being asked on behalf of someone else and knowing that a user of your nameserver asked for the ip of sexysheep.com doesn't give them a lot of useful info.

      I'm think many ISPs actually sell a lot of data from their recursive nameservers, but I'm willing to bet that almost no-one bothers to sniff port 53 udp traffic going elsewhere.

      My vote for the best privacy option is always going to be just run pi-hole with your own recursive nameservers.

      • rdme 3 hours ago ago

        The relay sees IP + ciphertext, the target sees question + relay's IP. No single party gets both

        • petcat 3 hours ago ago

          What if the relay and target are being operated by the same provider? The relay controls where the question is sent right? They can collude?

          • rdme 3 hours ago ago

            no, you are actually telling the relay where to redirect your question from the start (because you are encrypting the question with the public key of the destination resolver) - the relay sending the question where it wants would result in the destination to not be able to decrypt it

      • petcat 3 hours ago ago

        > your own recursive nameserver

        But then the internet can know that you are the one using your own resolvers and so they can trivially identify your traffic.

        Really you need to use some public resolver with a critical mass of other users in order to have any hope for anonymity. But then of course you have to trust that resolver too.

      • aftbit an hour ago ago

        I'm disappointed that sexysheep.com is just a domain parking page. I'm not sure what I was hoping for, but I think that's the worst possible outcome.

    • fc417fc802 4 hours ago ago

      I'd think that if you've got several leaks then patching one up is still forward progress even if it doesn't deliver a full fix immediately.

    • rdme 4 hours ago ago

      They solve different things. ODoH hides your question, not who you're talking to.

      • fc417fc802 3 hours ago ago

        Sure ODoH hides your query but you then turn around and leak the question you just asked as part of the TLS handshake.

        • rdme 3 hours ago ago

          I agree with you, however that's a separate problem that needs to be solved

  • piuvas 40 minutes ago ago

    anyone know how the diagram was made? pretty cool.

    • ndom91 37 minutes ago ago

      Claude. Check out the recent "the unusual effectiveness of HTML" articles on HN recently.

  • gigatexal 3 hours ago ago

    What would it take to get truly anonymous dns? I guess it’s not really possible no?

    • jeroenhd 3 hours ago ago

      You wrap the DNS request in a different layer of encryption than the relay server, so the relay server only knows you tried to resolve something, and the DNS server only knows someone tried to resolve a particular domain. That's how ODoH works.

      To make it harder for parties to collude, you need additional encrypted hops, the way Tor does. ODoH doesn't do that, unless you're routing ODoH through Tor of course.

      You would also need some kind of proof that the DNS records returned by the resolving DNS server haven't been tampered with, or a tracking DNS server could direct you to one of their IP addresses and proxy the request transparently. Unfortunately, the best solution we have for that is DNSSEC which is a very 90s take on DNS validation. It works fine if you don't abuse DNS in weird ways, but it's due for a redesign.

    • fc417fc802 3 hours ago ago

      Why not? Cloudflare makes 1.1.1.1 available over tor although the latency is through the roof and you still need to consider the possibility of fingerprinting the client network stack.

  • rdme 5 hours ago ago

    The relay is a systemd unit on a VPS, Caddy for TLS, SSRF-hardened (regex-strict hostnames, no IP literals). eTLD+1 same-operator check rejects relay+target run by the same org by default. HPKE is odoh-rs from Cloudflare

    ``` cargo install numa

    # set mode = "odoh" in numa.toml ```

    Repo: https://github.com/razvandimescu/numa

  • skinfaxi an hour ago ago

    What is the end-game for the private TLD? Is this going to turn into some cryptocurrency thing?

    • rdme an hour ago ago

      sovereign naming without ICANN or registrars - pkarr through DHT (not blockchain)