Sampei.Nihira Posted June 9, 2020 Share Posted June 9, 2020 (edited) Interesting test: https://www.skadligkod.se/general-security/phishing/malicious-site-filters-on-dns-in-2020/ Quad9 DNS ranks first for malware (92%) and phishing (100%) blocked. The blocking action of Quad9 DNS compared to that of AdGuard DNS: (Click with the mouse to enlarge the images) Unfortunately after several stress tests I concluded that Quad9 is malfunctioning in my Windows XP. Specifically, random unblocked occur, especially after emptying the cache dns. Test phishing websites: https://www.phishtank.com/phish_search.php?valid=y&active=y&Search=Search Frequent check: Offline - http://signinemail.weebly.com/ Online - http://kisalinkim.com/piabet Other comparison test: https://www.cloudflare.com/ssl/encrypted-sni/ Quad9: (Click with the mouse to enlarge the images) AdGuard: My final choice was AdGuard DNS, with second place for malware blocked (67%). MFNS users can try if they don't have problems with Quad9. MSFN users who choose AdGuard DNS should also integrate the browser with a custom phishing list on your ADBlocking. Phishing Army which can be found on the Filter List: https://filterlists.com/ This compensates for the lack of protection Google Safe Browsing not present in many browsers that we use. But above all because AdGuard DNS is in last place for phishing blocked (42%). Thanks for your attention. Edited June 9, 2020 by Sampei.Nihira 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted June 9, 2020 Share Posted June 9, 2020 You should give Pi-Hole a try. I do use it to protect all machines in my LAN. Big advantage is one single dedicated RaspberryPi protects all machines, and one has just one central ad/malware trap to configure and tweak. One RaspberryPi 3B or 3B+ is not much of a cost for such 24/7 protection. Of course, this is just my 2¢, and YMMV! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted June 9, 2020 Author Share Posted June 9, 2020 Thank you for your contribution to this discussion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Woodcock Posted June 10, 2020 Share Posted June 10, 2020 On 6/9/2020 at 12:24 PM, Sampei.Nihira said: Interesting test: https://www.skadligkod.se/general-security/phishing/malicious-site-filters-on-dns-in-2020/ Quad9 DNS ranks first for malware (92%) and phishing (100%) blocked. Unfortunately after several stress tests I concluded that Quad9 is malfunctioning in my Windows XP. Specifically, random unblocked occur, especially after emptying the cache dns. Have you contacted support@quad9.net? It's difficult to know what the problem is without a bit more information. But Quad9 per se will do the same thing regardless of what OS you're running. It's possible that there's an unexpected resolver behavior on your client (the OS using another recursor when Quad9 blocks, for instance), or that your queries to Quad9 are being intercepted along the way. Are you using DNS-over-TLS, DNScrypt, or DNS-over-HTTPs? If not, and you try one of them (easiest might be try to replicate the problem inside Mozilla, using Quad9 over DNS-over-HTTPs), do you also see the intermittent failure to block? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sampei.Nihira Posted June 10, 2020 Author Share Posted June 10, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Bill Woodcock said: Have you contacted support@quad9.net? It's difficult to know what the problem is without a bit more information. But Quad9 per se will do the same thing regardless of what OS you're running. It's possible that there's an unexpected resolver behavior on your client (the OS using another recursor when Quad9 blocks, for instance), or that your queries to Quad9 are being intercepted along the way. Are you using DNS-over-TLS, DNScrypt, or DNS-over-HTTPs? If not, and you try one of them (easiest might be try to replicate the problem inside Mozilla, using Quad9 over DNS-over-HTTPs), do you also see the intermittent failure to block? Hi, I have not contacted Quad9 support because there are no such problems in W.10. I did the usual stress tests with Chrome and Edge / Chromium without any problems. ___________ Maybe for the OS,but certainly not for browsers. ___________ Regarding the questions of the second part of your reply, don't forget that the topic of this forum is Windows XP. We cannot use the current versions of Firefox,Chrome ..... etc ... etc Edited June 10, 2020 by Sampei.Nihira Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Woodcock Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 22 hours ago, Sampei.Nihira said: Regarding the questions of the second part of your reply, don't forget that the topic of this forum is Windows XP. We cannot use the current versions of Firefox,Chrome ..... etc ... etc Sorry, sorry, not a Windows user myself, so didn't realize that, but it makes sense. My apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now