631
submitted 1 year ago by buh@lemmy.world to c/firefox@lemmy.ml
all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 43 points 1 year ago

Does this mean your isp can't see the sites you visit anymore?

[-] jsdz@lemmy.ml 79 points 1 year ago

Sort of. They can still see which IP address you're connecting to, which by itself or in combination with some minor traffic analysis is quite often enough to identify which website you've visited. Perhaps it isn't if the website puts absolutely everything through a giant CDN like Cloudflare, but in that case it's Cloudflare which gets to see all the sites you visit which isn't a whole lot better than the status quo.

Still, it's a little less information given away at least some of the time. Better to do it than not do it.

[-] Atemu@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago

in that case it’s Cloudflare which gets to see all the sites you visit

That's the status quo. CF holds the private keys to all reverse proxy'd sites hosted on it.

[-] jsdz@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

To be more precise, my belief is that the main thing ECH does is make it more difficult some of the time (depending on the details of how the site works) for observers of network traffic to directly see which website you've visited if it's one of those that have chosen to give all that data to Cloudflare or some similar system instead.

There also do still exist some simple web hosting setups that share many independent domain names on the same IP, but I think it's not as common as it probably was when they first came up with the idea of encrypting the tls server name many years ago. Maybe it'll make a comeback for sites whose users need to avoid censorship in this way if it's true that domain fronting has generally become more difficult.

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago
[-] patatahooligan@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Using a VPN just hands all of this information to them instead. That could be an improvement, but how do you know?

[-] kautau@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well they can see your browsing history, sure. But HTTPS will stop them from seeing the content you actually see on the web. At this point we are just getting into discussions of layers of trust, which are generally impossible to solve if you don’t trust anyone. If you don’t trust anyone don’t use the internet, ever. I do trust mullvad. They’re explicit about who is involved, I have the name of every team member, and through peer review I consider them trustworthy.

https://mullvad.net/en/about

For more info about how they are transparent, you can read their article about how they responded to a search warrant earlier this year:

https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2023/4/20/mullvad-vpn-was-subject-to-a-search-warrant-customer-data-not-compromised/

In line with our policies such customer data did not exist. We argued they had no reason to expect to find what they were looking for and any seizures would therefore be illegal under Swedish law. After demonstrating that this is indeed how our service works and them consulting the prosecutor they left without taking anything and without any customer information.

[-] patatahooligan@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

But HTTPS will stop them from seeing the content you actually see on the web.

Sure, but that was true for your ISP as well. I'm not questioning what data you're leaking. I'm saying that it's the same data and you only change who you leak it to if you choose to use a VPN.

It seems like you've thought about it and you have made an informed choice. That's great and I don't have anything to argue against here. The only reason I commented is that there seems to be a trend of "just use VPN and your data is protected" mentality, especially with all the ads in gaming/tech related content. There was no way for me to know if you or the other users who would read your initial comment were aware that using a VPN doesn't magically protect your data if you don't know who your provider is, so I though I'd point it out.

[-] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 year ago

Well, for half of the internet they are going to see AWS ELBs addresses.

[-] hillbicks@feddit.de 10 points 1 year ago

Yes and no. If your isp is still providing unencrypted DNS for you, then they can still see the domain name you're visiting.

[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 year ago

What if you force a dns, like say cloudflare?

[-] Ullebe1@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

Ordinary DNS requests are always plaintext and readable to anyone between you and the DNS server. So regardless of which DNS server you use, your ISP can see all your DNS lookups. For any amount of privacy for DNS, the minimum is something like DNS-over-TLS or DNS-over-HTTPS, the latter of which Firefox uses by default in some countries and supports everywhere.

[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago

I mean with this + DNS over HTTPS can we guarantee the isp can no longer see anything?

[-] Fissionami@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

They'll only see the IP you're connecting with and encrypted data packets being transferred on.

[-] dan@upvote.au 5 points 1 year ago

Ordinary DNS requests are always plaintext and readable to anyone between you and the DNS server.

Not just readable... The ISP can inject their own responses too. Regular DNS is both unencrypted and unauthenticated, with most clients not enforcing DNSSEC.

[-] FrankTheHealer@lemmy.world 41 points 1 year ago

Cool. Nice work Mozilla.

[-] LBEB80@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

When is this coming to ff mobile?

[-] Knusper@feddit.de 13 points 1 year ago

Usually with these kind of engine-features, the rollout is simultaneous on desktop and Android.

And it says it's rolling out with version 118 here: https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/understand-encrypted-client-hello

[-] possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip 16 points 1 year ago

Does anyone know how to enable this for nginx?

[-] sloppy_diffuser@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago

It's been a couple years since I was involved with ECH, but the implementations at the time were:

The one by the draft's authors in golang (Cloudflare). This is the actual test server. It uses Cloudflare's fork of golang with an enhanced crypto library. https://gist.github.com/cjpatton/da8814704b8daa48cb6c16eafdb8e402

BoringSSL used for chrome. There are nginx builds with BoringSSL, but I don't know if the setting are exposed.

https://boringssl.googlesource.com/boringssl/+/refs/heads/master/ssl/encrypted_client_hello.cc

WolfSSL which I never got around to playing with.

https://www.wolfssl.com/encrypted-client-hello-ech-now-supported-wolfssl/

NSS which is Mozilla's TLS library. There is a test server buried in there some place for unit testing.

https://firefox-source-docs.mozilla.org/security/nss/index.html

With that, you ALSO need a DNS server that supports DNS over HTTP (DoH) and HTTPS service binding records (https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-dnsop-svcb-https/).

Bind9 had branches for both and I was able merge the two to satisfy that requirement.

When connecting to such a server, you MUST NOT use a DNS resolver hosted by any origination along the path from client to server as they can correlate the host from the DNS request with your encrypted client hello. You can actually man-in-the-middle ECH to decrypt the client hello by overriding the hosts record when controlling the DNS resolver. My project was testing this for parental controls.

Keep in mind, ECH really only benefits users connecting to a CDN. That is, when multiple services are behind the same IP. It masks which host the user is going to for any hop between the client and server.

Any data mining company worth their evils will have an IP to DNS index to figure out the host when only one is behind an IP.

This marginally gives some privacy to users. It hides the host from your ISP. It REALLY benefits browser companies and CDN hosts. What hosts a user is visiting now becomes exclusive data for those companies thereby driving up the value of the data. Assuming you aren't being stupid with your addons.

[-] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 12 points 1 year ago

https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/kb/faq-encrypted-client-hello#w_can-i-use-ech-alongside-other-security-tools-like-ad-blockers

Users using DNS-based filtering may need to tweak their configuration in order to make use of ECH. Firefox needs to be configured with a DNS-over-HTTPS server in order to make use of ECH. Depending on whether the DNS filter is locally hosted or hosted by an online provider, instructions for connecting to it over DoH will differ and users of these services will need to check their accompanying documentation.

Sooo, I'm a bit lost here. How do I ensure everything's working when I'm using a pihole? I don't think I'm understanding everything correctly

[-] TheKaul@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago

It sounds like you'll have to set your Pihole as the DNS server in Firefox's settings, and then maybe from there it'll work itself out? Or maybe the Pihole documentation will be updated in the next few days with some instructions on enabling this. I'm unsure myself to be honest.

[-] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

That would make sense, wouldn't it? I think I'm going to wait for the pihole team to inform about this.

[-] KarnaSubarna@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

In my opinion, Firefox should give an option to enable ECH forcefully for users like me who has AdGuardHome/Pi-Hole running on Home Network. Currently, if DOH is disabled in Firefox setting, ECH won't work, as per Firefox. 😦

this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
631 points (98.9% liked)

Firefox

17303 readers
27 users here now

A place to discuss the news and latest developments on the open-source browser Firefox

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS