Slashdot Mirror


Google Launches Public DNS Resolver

AdmiralXyz writes "Google has announced the launch of their free DNS resolution service, called Google Public DNS. According to their blog post, Google Public DNS uses continuous record prefetching to avoid cache misses — hopefully making the service faster — and implements a variety of techniques to block spoofing attempts. They also say that (unlike an increasing number of ISPs), Google Public DNS behaves exactly according to the DNS standard, and will not redirect you to advertising in the event of a failed lookup. Very cool, but of course there are questions about Google's true motivations behind knowing every site you visit."

58 of 540 comments (clear)

  1. I guess it is good news... by ls671 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    > They also say that (unlike an increasing number of ISPs), Google Public DNS behaves exactly according to the DNS standard.

    Congratulations, this would then be the first free service that I know of which doesn't do redirect ! ;-)

    I setup my own DNS but I guess it is a little overkill for the common every day user. Setting your own DNS means you have to go to the network (e.g. internet) less often because your locally hosted DNS caches the already visited sites for a TTL period of time. This is especially true if you have several computers and that they tend to visit the same sites.

    Let me add that if your ISP or firewall intercepts requests to port 53, you will still be stuck with it ;-(

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    1. Re:I guess it is good news... by sopssa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Congratulations, this would then be the first free service that I know of which doesn't do redirect ! ;-)

      I guess they're using that as a selling point and to come of "nicer". If they're just after datamining the DNS requests, this service can happily run on negative income, because it improves Google's other things and provides them even more data.

      Google is datamining everywhere and everything already.

    2. Re:I guess it is good news... by ahecht · · Score: 4, Informative

      4.2.2.2 and their ilk are free and non-redirecting. You can use 4.2.2.1 4.2.2.2 4.2.2.3 4.2.2.4 4.2.2.5 or 4.2.2.6

      They are run by L-3 and sitting on major backbones, and the ip addresses are pooled, so that you will likely get a server that is geographically near you when you use one of those addresses.

    3. Re:I guess it is good news... by afidel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually L3 is turning off public access to those resolvers and has been for a while, sometimes you will not get any response at other times they just degrade response times.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    4. Re:I guess it is good news... by node+3 · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is a good think

      It's also double plus ironic.

    5. Re:I guess it is good news... by sexconker · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course you can still have cache misses.

      You: Gimme goat.se
      Google: That's not in my cache, hold on.

      Google: Hey auth DNS gimme goat.se
      Auth: K, here.

      Google: Hey you, here.
      You: K.

      Your mom: Gimme goat.se:
      Google: Yeah, I have that, here.
      Your mom: K.

      Your dad: I NEED the goat.se !
      Google: Yeah I have that, but I need to recache it. Here's what I already have, it's probably still good.

      Google: Hey auth DNS gimme goat.se
      Auth: K, here.

      Your dad: WTF? Where's the gaping anus?!
      Google: Yeah, looks like the one I gave you before was wrong. No worries, this one is fresh.
      Your dad: Sweet mother of corn holes.

      Updating your cache early doesn't solve anything. You get less of a chance of misses only because you've checked more frequently. This comes at a performance cost on Google's end. Any DNS provider can cache anything for however long they want and return whatever result they think is valid.

      The obvious thing to do is return your most recent authoritative result for cached domains or get one if it's not a cached domain. Choosing to empty out your cache after something has expired vs. refreshing it from auth is a performance decision. As is choosing whether or not to dump something when updating, or keep it around in case you get requests for it while you're updating. As is the overall frequency with which you update your cache.

      No magic, brilliance, or good will on Google's part here - just horsepower and the willingness to operate at a financial loss in order to mine more data.

    6. Re:I guess it is good news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Brief history lesson:

      DARPA asked BBN to build the arpanet. They built and owned Autonomous System Number 1. (ASN1)
      BBN split into BBN Technologies and BBN Networking. BBN Technologies went of and did their own thing. BBN Networking kept ASN1 and grew into a tier 1 ISP.
      GTE bought BBN Networking and renamed the division GTE Internet ( aka GTEI )
      Southern Bell bought GTE but wasn't allowed to keep all of it due to monopoly laws put in place during the Ma Bell breakup. They renamed the Telco part Verizon and spun off the infringing internet bit as Genuity.
      Genuity was funded through a 'guaranteed' $2B revolving credit line by Verizon.
      Verizon lobbied enough people to overturn enough of regulations such that they no longer needed Genuity at all, and dumped the loan.
      Genuity's remaing assets were sold in bankruptcy to Level 3 Communications, including ASN1, the 4.0.0.0/8 and 8.0.0.0/8 ARIN allocations and the gtei.net name.

    7. Re:I guess it is good news... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Google is datamining everywhere and everything already.

      Yeah, but so is my ISP.

      Virgin Media keep extensive logs of DNS requests, as the government requires them to, for at least one year. Google keep your IP address logged for 24 hours, then remove it and keep the other DNS request data for an indefinite period.

      What is more concerning to me is that my ISP knows who I am. They can easily link up DNS requests with my account and billing details. Google probably could link it up with their other data pools if they wanted to, but they don't require you to have a Google account to use their servers so you don't have to provide them with any more details than your current IP address. E.g. you could use Yahoo for all searches and never send Google any more than just an IP address.

      What it boils down to is that I trust Google a lot more than I trust Virgin Media. At least Google publishes what they do with your data and doesn't sell it to third parties.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    8. Re:I guess it is good news... by Hucko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think that Google gets the free pass because they have so far shown themselves to be the least intrusive, paternalistic and/or come the closest to giving us what we want. And they stand out a fair distance from the rest of the bunch.

      Most of us acknowledge that there isn't a free lunch, so Google *so far* has been enabling the internet to function on its technical capabilities while making a profit. Surely you recognise that a lot of business models block the capabilities of technology to bolster their profits? Google seems to take the opposite approach. This often leads to businesses complaining about their methods, but consumers/customers/collaborators are enabled.

      --
      Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
    9. Re:I guess it is good news... by SnowZero · · Score: 4, Informative

      If they're just after datamining the DNS requests, this service can happily run on negative income, because it improves Google's other things and provides them even more data.

      This is untrue. From the Google DNS privacy page, linked from the blog post (emphasis added):

      Google Public DNS stores two sets of logs: temporary and permanent. The temporary logs store the full IP address of the machine you're using. We have to do this so that we can spot potentially bad things like DDoS attacks and so we can fix problems, such as particular domains not showing up for specific users. We delete these temporary logs within 24 to 48 hours.

      In the permanent logs, we don't keep personally identifiable information or IP information. We do keep some location information (at the city/metro level) so that we can conduct debugging, analyze abuse phenomena and improve the Google Public DNS prefetching feature. We don't correlate or combine your information from these logs with any other log data that Google might have about your use of other services, such as data from Web Search and data from advertising on the Google content network. After keeping this data for two weeks, we randomly sample a small subset for permanent storage.

      That page also details exactly what features are logged. Does your current upstream DNS provider document their logging policies?

      Disclaimer: I work for Google, but I will cite my sources.

    10. Re:I guess it is good news... by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That was what I was assuming; does this mean that Google is going to DoS things like DynDNS out of existence?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  2. DDoS attacks by avij · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But I thought open recursive DNS servers were bad -- haven't you heard of DNS DDoS amplification attacks? Why would Google's open recursive DNS service be any better in this regard?

    --

    Follow your Euro bills at EBT
    1. Re:DDoS attacks by darkmeridian · · Score: 5, Informative

      Google's DNS service defends against DDoS amplification attacks by using rate-limiting techniques. From Google:

      The best approach for combating DoS attacks is to impose a rate-limiting or "throttling" mechanism. Google Public DNS implements two kinds of rate control:
      Rate control of outgoing requests to other nameservers. To protect other DNS nameservers against DoS attacks that could be launched from our resolver servers, Google Public DNS enforces per-nameserver QPS limits on outgoing requests from each serving cluster.
      Rate control of outgoing responses to clients. To protect any other systems against amplification and traditional distributed DoS (botnet) attacks that could be launched from our resolver servers, Google Public DNS performs two types of rate limiting on client queries:
      To protect against traditional volume-based attacks, each server imposes per-client-IP QPS and average bandwidth limits.
      To guard against amplification attacks, in which large responses to small queries are exploited, each server enforces a per-client-IP maximum average amplification factor. The average amplification factor is a configurable ratio of response-to-query size, determined from historical traffic patterns observed in our server logs.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
  3. At least they have a clear privacy policy by Edgewize · · Score: 5, Informative

    They state very bluntly that IP addresses are expunged from the logs after 48 hours, and that no data is shared with Google Accounts or other Google services. They still get to play with a lot of aggregated data, but this seems like a fairly non-evil way to do it. Good for them. http://code.google.com/speed/public-dns/faq.html#privacy

    1. Re:At least they have a clear privacy policy by TheModelEskimo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Uh, actually it's their service and the ToS changes anytime they want it to. This is also known as a phased takeover, in case you haven't noticed other corporations *starting out* with a beautifully ethical ToS before.

    2. Re:At least they have a clear privacy policy by Idiomatick · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Point to one instance of a Google ToS getting worse. We are talking about a DNS server. Only /. types know what that is nvm would be willing to change theirs. Were Google to change their policy it would be pretty widespread news in the tiny group of people that use it. I don't know what you think they'd have to gain from annoying a bunch of nerds (re: people that support and build their whole business). More likely they made something for internal/personal use and just decided to release it because... well it's Google, they can.

  4. Don't get me wrong, I love Google. by olsmeister · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But it sure seems like they're getting more and more of my personal information lately. What I search for, where I surf to, with my Droid where I navigate to, my e-mails, my documents. WOW.

    1. Re:Don't get me wrong, I love Google. by mcgrew · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, Google knows everything about me... except who I am!

    2. Re:Don't get me wrong, I love Google. by TrippTDF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm not fearful of the current Google, I'm fearful of the Google when we're three generations of leadership down the road and someone with fewer scruples is at the helm. What we need now more than ever is rock-solid privacy laws in this country that put looking at someone's data on par with searching their home... it can be done, but you need to get warrants and have a damn good reason to be doing it.

      There is a lot of amazing advantages to having your data aggregated the way that Google has it, and it's not rocket science to manage the downsides.

    3. Re:Don't get me wrong, I love Google. by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Funny

      Underwear and t-shirt? Why would I need underwear and a t-shirt?

  5. Why? by sopssa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But why would one change to use Google's DNS? If you're technical enough and care about such, you're way better off setting up your own recursive DNS server.

    Google is just datamining from DNS requests here, it's another source of information. At least with your own ISP you can reasonably think that theres no datamining going on (excluding US ISP's, of course, who serve ads on non-existing domains for their users anyway)

    1. Re:Why? by slashkitty · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Uh, yeah. Comcast switched ads on non domains.. and i'm sure they are datamining it too. Unfortunately, I trust google more than comcast more than some independent group with open dns.

      --
      -- these are only opinions and they might not be mine.
    2. Re:Why? by Nadaka · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know what? If I did what comcast has done with intercepting DNS requests and corrupting DNS responses, I would be committing 2 or more federal felonies, for profit no less. I would like some justice.

    3. Re:Why? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Their pipes, their rules. Feel free to buy service from another last mile provider.

    4. Re:Why? by rhathar · · Score: 3, Informative
      OpenDNS doesn't follow the DNS standards, whereas Google's DNS does. From Wikipedia:

      While the OpenDNS name resolution service is free, people have complained about how the service handles failed requests. If a domain cannot be found, the service redirects you to a search page with search results and advertising provided by Yahoo!. A DNS user can switch this off via the OpenDNS Control Panel but will lose content filtering ability. This behavior is similar to that of many large ISP's who also redirect failed requests to their own servers containing advertising. [12]

      In 2007, David Ulevitch explained that in response to Dell installing "Browser Address Error Redirector" software on their PCs, OpenDNS started resolving requests to Google.com. Some of the traffic is handled by OpenDNS typo-correcting service which corrects mistyped addresses and redirects keyword addresses to OpenDNS's search page, while the rest is transparently passed through to the intended recipient.[13]

      Also, a user's search request from the address bar of a browser that is configured to use the Google search engine (with a certain parameter configured) may be covertly redirected to a server owned by OpenDNS without the user's consent (but within the OpenDNS Terms of Service).[14] Users can disable this behavior by logging in to their OpenDNS account and unchecking "OpenDNS proxy" option.[15] Additionally, Mozilla users can fix this problem by installing an extension[16] or by simply changing or removing the navclient sourceid from their keyword search URLs.

      This redirection breaks some non-web applications which rely on getting an NXDOMAIN for non-existent domains, such as e-mail spam filtering, or VPN access where the private network's nameservers are consulted only when the public ones fail to resolve.

      --
      http://www.chaotickingdoms.com
    5. Re:Why? by zunger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That depends on whether you're running a Linux box at home in a "reliable enough" way to be functioning as a server. And in the example you give, as your primary machine as well. While I realize that many /. users do this, I would certainly say that most people don't.

      I actually stopped doing it several years ago. I concluded that I have to maintain enough complex systems at work; I don't see any need to be a sysadmin for a complex system that requires nonstop patching and understanding of 30-year-old system internals at home, too. Plus the desktop environment was frankly primitive compared to modern machines. So I ditched it and started running OS X. (And I should say that I'm an experienced Linux sysadmin and engineer professionally, so this was not the "I don't know how to use it and it appears to have been designed by badgers" issue)

      It's definitely true that, if you're already doing all of the work to run your own system at home, adding a DNS server isn't a big deal. But that's really a hobbyist thing to do. If your home system is primarily for the purpose of getting things done, rather than for playing with systems, it's an enormous amount of extra work. Yet having faster DNS lookups is still a win.

  6. 8.8.8.8/4 by Xacid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "To try it out:

    Configure your network settings to use the IP addresses 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 as your DNS servers..."

    Simple enough to remember which is great. Also - could this be used to circumvent some of the internet security at some workplaces where they seem to run a blacklist of specific sites?

    1. Re:8.8.8.8/4 by sopssa · · Score: 4, Funny

      Would be interesting to know how much Google paid for those two 256 ranges to Level 3. One would think simple ip's like 8.8.8.8 would cost some nice amount too.

      Or maybe they should had used the coolest ip on the net, aka

      > host 69.69.69.69
      69.69.69.69.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer the-coolest-ip-on-the-net.com.

    2. Re:8.8.8.8/4 by dave562 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Anyone running Windows Server as their internal DNS server is probably forwarding DNS requests to an external name server. The workstation DNS settings are most likely controlled with DHCP, and if the admin has half a brain (I know, that's a big assumption), the users don't have rights to change the network settings.

      Most internet security applications are usually proxy servers, or something like a Websense box. Those filter all traffic regardless of where the name resolution takes place. In fact, Websense can be configured to block DNS requests to non-approved / external servers (as can any firewall, etc).

      Do your network admins a favor and use your work computer for work. Don't try to get around their access controls. Most of the time they'd love to give you free access to the internet, but the reality is that they are responsible for keeping Windows boxes secure. That isn't an easy job. What you might perceive as network admin Nazi behaviors is really just them protecting you from yourself... or your co-workers from themselves, etc.

    3. Re:8.8.8.8/4 by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 4, Informative

      If your network security relies on limiting DNS lookups, you don't really have any network security at all. You might as well take the house numbers off the front of your house to make it harder for burglars to find your house to break in.

  7. Re:Yet another privacy risking tool I won't mind u by FooAtWFU · · Score: 3, Informative

    But I doubt it'll be as memorable as 4.2.2.2 for those emergency DNS outages.

    8.8.8.8, 8.8.4.4.

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  8. Not everyday by dmayle · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Forget everyday use, but on public wifi, I'm all about this!

  9. Questions? by whisper_jeff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...but of course there are questions about Google's true motivations behind knowing every site you visit.

    No there aren't. You'd have to have been living under a rock for the past decade to have any questions about their motives. It's dead simple - they want to know what people are looking at so that they can better target people with advertising thereby increasing the value of their service. In return for offering various free services, all they ask for is some information on you so that they can better target advertising that interests _YOU_. It's not rocket science - it's just incredibly effective marketing.

    1. Re:Questions? by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Except in this case, they claim your IP will be gone from their logs in 24 hours, and it'll never be associated with anything else you do at Google.

      My guess is, they want broad statistics like the most popular domains visited, maybe even traffic patterns of which domains people tend to go to after which other domains.

      So you're right, the motives are quite transparent. Except in this case, I have no idea why I wouldn't want to participate. It's likely to be a hell of a lot more responsive than my ISP's DNS.

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    2. Re:Questions? by nine-times · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And sorry, but just to complete the thought, there's a very good reason why Google would want to do this even if they don't get any data mining or ad revenue in any direct way: Think about all the other services (OpenDNS or ISPs) that redirect failed searches to their own search page. Every time that happens, that's a search that doesn't go through Google. As far as Google is concerned, you getting a proper response of "This page doesn't exist" is good for them, because they know your next stop will be Google.com.

    3. Re:Questions? by vitaflo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "My guess is, they want broad statistics like the most popular domains visited, maybe even traffic patterns of which domains people tend to go to after which other domains."

      I'd go further. Given the announcement of Chrome OS, I wouldn't doubt they want to test a huge number of DNS requests and tweak the system to be as fast as possible to speed up Chrome. Google knows latency is an issue with web apps, and is trying to do all they can to reduce this. I think this is just another step in that direction.

  10. Google was going to hire DJB to make this work by fotoguzzi · · Score: 5, Funny

    but they didn't want too much brilliance all in one place.

    --
    Their they're doing there hair.
  11. Re:OpenDNS by yakatz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    OpenDNS hijacks Google searches, which could be part of Google's motivation also.

  12. Re:so? by metamechanical · · Score: 5, Funny

    fEEL FREE TO OPT OUT AT ANY TIME.

    They have a great program for that!

    --
    If I had a nickel for every time I had a nickel, I'd be richcursive!
  13. Why all the paranoia over Google? by Fished · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Very cool, but of course there are questions about Google's true motivations behind knowing every site you visit.

    Look.. Google's in the advertising and data aggregation business, yes. But ... there is a level of suspicion and fear directed at Google that just seems extreme. Has Google actually done something "Evil" that I missed? Or it is just paranoia? I personally think that it's much more likely that OpenDNS or my ISP would do something crazy with this sort of information than Google.

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
  14. No IPv6 records :-( by Cronq · · Score: 4, Informative

    They don't publish own IPv6 records via this resolver :-(

  15. NTP pool & GeoIP by avij · · Score: 4, Informative

    The NTP pool (which probably needs even more NTP servers, btw) was recently changed so that the project's DNS servers return a list of nearest available NTP servers when queried. If you change your settings to use Google's DNS servers, the pool will now respond with a list of NTP servers close to Google's DNS servers, which may not be what you wanted.

    --

    Follow your Euro bills at EBT
    1. Re:NTP pool & GeoIP by avij · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Any NTP server at any stratum is welcome to join the pool. The only actual requirement is that the server should have a static IP address. The how do I join page has further information. If you already have a functioning NTP server, all you have to do is to log in and add your server's DNS name/IP address and its available bandwidth (for load balancing purposes). I'd say it's a rather simple process.

      --

      Follow your Euro bills at EBT
    2. Re:NTP pool & GeoIP by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Awesome. Away I go adding 6 servers.

  16. Why not do both? by FranTaylor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Set up your own DNS server and point it at google's.

    Then you can take advantage of your cache and their cache.

    google could do us a great service by also making it available on some other port, that way we can get around the ISP interception of DNS requests.

    1. Re:Why not do both? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      We put a cache in your cache so you can browse while you browse.

    2. Re:Why not do both? by Richy_T · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Definitely this. My ISP changed their upstream provider and *their* network was intercepting requests on port 53. Luckily, I also administer DNS on another network so set up a bypass on port 54. Personally, I think providing false DNS information should count as fraud.

  17. and there's the other motive for Google. by FooAtWFU · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If you're on $garbage_DNS and you're served an advertisement/search page instead of NXDOMAIN, you (or your browser's auto-search) won't search Google. For that matter, just having something like this around will discourage $garbage_DNS.

    Google cares about the Internet. It's where they make their money.

    --
    The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  18. Re:SPDNSY by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 5, Informative

    everything resolves to Google's proxies.

    Really?

    $ host slashdot.org
    slashdot.org has address 216.34.181.45
    slashdot.org mail is handled by 10 mx.corp.sourceforge.com.
    $ host slashdot.org 8.8.8.8
    Using domain server:
    Name: 8.8.8.8
    Address: 8.8.8.8#53
    Aliases:
     
    slashdot.org has address 216.34.181.45
    $ host 216.34.181.45
    45.181.34.216.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer slashdot.org

    You, sir, are a liar.

    Cue *whoosh* in 3..2.. actually, I still don't get it. Either you're trolling because you hate Google, or there's some obscure joke that I still don't understand. I really don't get how your list of crap it requires (most of which doesn't exist or doesn't apply to DNS) is funny -- are Google known for requiring random stuff like that?

    I mean, they don't even touch NX:

    $ host aoeusnth.com
    Host aoeusnth.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)
    $ host aoeusnth.com 8.8.8.8
    Using domain server:
    Name: 8.8.8.8
    Address: 8.8.8.8#53
    Aliases:
     
    Host aoeusnth.com not found: 3(NXDOMAIN)

    That's more than you can say for most ISP-level resolvers.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  19. Re:What's their motivation? by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 4, Informative

    RTFA:

    Google Public DNS stores two sets of logs: temporary and permanent. The temporary logs store the full IP address of the machine you're using. We have to do this so that we can spot potentially bad things like DDoS attacks and so we can fix problems, such as particular domains not showing up for specific users.

    We delete these temporary logs within 24 to 48 hours.

    In the permanent logs, we don't keep personally identifiable information or IP information. We do keep some location information (at the city/metro level) so that we can conduct debugging, analyze abuse phenomena and improve the Google Public DNS prefetching feature. We don't correlate or combine your information from these logs with any other log data that Google might have about your use of other services, such as data from Web Search and data from advertising on the Google content network. After keeping this data for two weeks, we randomly sample a small subset for permanent storage.

    So in other words, for less than two days, their DNS log, and nothing else, will know that a particular request was made from a particular IP. Other than that, they'll know that someone from your ISP, or perhaps from your whole fscking city, made that request -- maybe. I'm guessing they'll be looking at overall trends.

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  20. Re:trying it... by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 5, Informative

    disregard that, I suck cocks.

    --
    "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
  21. Re:OpenNIC has been offering this for years now... by svtdragon · · Score: 3, Informative
    You still haven't read the privacy page, have you? They don't correlate it with search queries or any other data they have from you:

    "Google Public DNS stores two sets of logs: temporary and permanent. The temporary logs store the full IP address of the machine you're using," the company said. "We have to do this so that we can spot potentially bad things like DDoS attacks and so we can fix problems, such as particular domains not showing up for specific users. We delete these temporary logs within 24 to 48 hours.

    "In the permanent logs, we don't keep personally identifiable information or IP information. We do keep some location information (at the city/metro level) so that we can conduct debugging, analyze abuse phenomena and improve the Google Public DNS prefetching feature. We don't correlate or combine your information from these logs with any other log data that Google might have about your use of other services, such as data from Web Search and data from advertising on the Google content network. After keeping this data for two weeks, we randomly sample a small subset for permanent storage."

  22. Re:OpenNIC has been offering this for years now... by rhathar · · Score: 3, Informative

    Except that Google only stores records for 24-48 hours and then deletes them and does not share the data with its ads department or any other Google services.

    --
    http://www.chaotickingdoms.com
  23. Re:OpenDNS by sildur · · Score: 3, Informative

    OpenDNS is not hijacking google searches. They simply fix broken google searches.

  24. Re:It is not the fastet DNS, at least not for me by WARM3CH · · Score: 5, Informative

    Oh crap! I reported the Minimum time, not the average! Here is the full report:

    (Min | Avg | Max | Std.Dev |Reliab%)

    My university:
    Cached Name | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 100.0
    Uncached Name | 0.008 | 0.060 | 0.225 | 0.065 | 100.0
    DotCom Lookup | 0.181 | 3.984 | 4.203 | 0.633 | 100.0

    OpenDNS (208. 67.220.220)
    Cached Name | 0.005 | 0.006 | 0.008 | 0.001 | 100.0
    Uncached Name | 0.008 | 0.066 | 0.190 | 0.053 | 100.0
    DotCom Lookup | 0.009 | 0.131 | 0.198 | 0.064 | 100.0

    Level 3 (4. 2. 2. 3)
    Cached Name | 0.024 | 0.025 | 0.028 | 0.001 | 100.0
    Uncached Name | 0.026 | 0.071 | 0.206 | 0.056 | 100.0
    DotCom Lookup | 0.025 | 0.081 | 0.191 | 0.058 | 100.0

    Google (8.8.8.8)
    Cached Name | 0.044 | 0.061 | 0.206 | 0.038 | 100.0
    Uncached Name | 0.048 | 0.144 | 0.322 | 0.075 | 97.9
    DotCom Lookup | 0.069 | 0.158 | 0.261 | 0.051 | 100.0

  25. So, are you volunteering? by KingSkippus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So Google fanboism has gotten to the point where people are HAPPY about getting more targetted ads?

    No, but we're smart enough to realize that no one is going to pay out of pocket to provide all the services that Google does for free with no revenue model at all, not even to pay for the infrastructure servers and network necessary to do it.

    I'll make you a deal. Multi-billionaire technology philanthropist that you seem to be, you set up a company to compete with Google, one that provides all that they do and that has exactly zero sources of revenue, and I'll willingly become your fanboy.

    The practical situation is that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch. When Google came along, we were headed towards every web site--especially search engines and directories--pushing out more and more pop-ups, pop-unders, interstitials, graphics-heavy, annoying ads, and they changed that. God forbid any of them actually contribute back to the community in the form of numerous open source projects and free services.

    Google changed all that by providing a much more customer-friendly "less is more" philosophy, and their customers have supported their efforts in a very free market-friendly way. So while you can take potshots at targeted advertising if you want, I honestly can't think of a less obtrusive and relatively harmless revenue model that can support all that Google does and how much they are contributing to advancing technology.

    While I'd love for someone to volunteer to do all that Google does without making money for it, given that that's not going to happen, yeah, targeted advertising is about the least annoying way I can think of to get the bills paid and continue providing service.

  26. Better Google than your ISP by Charles+Dodgeson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Google is datamining everywhere and everything already.

    When I first read about this, I immediately thought about datamining. But after another second, I figured that I would prefer Google to have this information than Verizon (where my caching DNS server currently forwards to). It is true that Google is better at datamining, but do keep in mind that whoever is providing your DNS service has the information about your DNS requests.

    Another difference between Google and your ISP is that your ISP knows who you are from your IP address. So they can link DNS resolution requests to specific, named, customers. Google can't do that directly.

    --
    Prime numbers are exactly what Alan Greenspan says they are -S. Minsky
    1. Re:Better Google than your ISP by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 3, Interesting

      it's easier, and perhaps routine practice for your isp to log dns requests to their dns servers, whereas i would have imagined that sniffing packets that are not destined for their servers and logging the contents would be a willful act of wiretapping

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons