I’m with the author. DNS4EU is being sold as “sovereignty,” but it’s just another centralized resolver sitting on the same foreign-owned infrastructure we already depend on. Shuffling everyone’s queries through one EU-branded endpoint doesn’t fix privacy or resilience—it just adds another middleman. If the EU really wants independence, it should invest in making local ISP resolvers secure and trustworthy instead of outsourcing the job yet again.
> Shuffling everyone’s queries through one EU-branded endpoint doesn’t fix privacy or resilience—it just adds another middleman.
The ENTIRE point is to be a publicly funded middleman that doesn’t collect or expose user data.
It’s not about “sovereignty” over DNS - it is primarily to prevent dns providers invading user privacy. Go and read the official documentation on ENISA.
Maybe you should have at least a rudimentary understanding of it’s purpose before making uninformed judgements?
Should be easy enough. But, the problem is the scale. I work at a privacy conscious EU based startup and we used to use quad9 for our infra. Shortly after we started using, we started to hit scalability issues. When the whole eu traffic was hot, our DNS query latency would also go up. To be able to keep up, we had to switch back to CF and Google. Hope there is a really good alternative one day.
Sure thing, but essentially it would be another thing that we have to make sure that it is protected and performant. At the time of building a startup, that’s still an item we are leaving someone else to manage.
