Unbound, operating in recursive resolver mode. Makes bugger all difference to the DNS resolution times.

Thanks for the quick replies.

I will go back to using my ISP DNS server.

Getflix

Quad9 is the fastest of the privacy-focused DNS services for me down south, and 1.1.1.1 next best. YMMV

Talkiet:

 

My ISPs DNS servers of course :-) They are the fastest. (And yes I know it's caching anyway - but for almost everyone the ISP assigned DNS are the best option - even for most of those who think they aren't)

 

Cheers - N

 

If my ISP blocks a lot of content is this still the case? This is a serious (not NZ) question.

I live in a country that has content restrictions.

Handle9:

 

If my ISP blocks a lot of content is this still the case? This is a serious (not NZ) question.

 

I live in a country that has content restrictions.

 

The difference between your ISP and most major public resolvers is barely noticeable by our standards if any. It just comes down to who do you trust to give you the correct answer, and whether you want to share your data with one or two companies. Or you can run the tree yourself.

As to the underlying question, it depends on how they block content; if they are blocking by IP, there isn't much outside a VPN that would fix that. If they are just DNS hijacking, then any public resolver will fix that. It won't stop them from seeing the follow-up request for that IP address though. So, a VPN + public resolver is the only thing that will fix that. 

xor: Cloudflare, NZ ISP's have shown they have no moral issue with sending fraudulent DNS responses.

Wow.

You support a company that has no regard for the law or the spread of disinformation and think RSP's who are keen to show some morals by blocking a handful of sites after a major hate speech attack are the bad guys?! 

Handle9:

 

If my ISP blocks a lot of content is this still the case? This is a serious (not NZ) question.

 

I live in a country that has content restrictions.

 

If this were the case here* then I think a lot of us would use 3rd party DNS servers (especially with Pihole) if we could. As it is NZ ISPs are mostly trustworthy so we have little reason to need anything else.  Exceptions would be wanting access to US Netflix (or similar) and using a DNS proxy to do this.  In the past I have used Getflix DNS for this reason. Now though the content differences aren't enough for me to bother and I just use my ISPs DNS servers.

* Some ISPs do take some block lists from the government (the DIA) to block some sites. These are sites the support abhorrent crimes such as child abuse. Some detail on that here: https://www.dia.govt.nz/Censorship-and-the-Internet

sbiddle:

 

xor: Cloudflare, NZ ISP's have shown they have no moral issue with sending fraudulent DNS responses.

 

Wow.

 

You support a company that has no regard for the law or the spread of disinformation and think RSP's who are keen to show some morals by blocking a handful of sites after a major hate speech attack are the bad guys?! 

 

I can't speak for the OP but I consider an RSP's job is to provide an unfiltered, uncensored connection to the internet unless its customers explicitly opt in to censorship. When RSPs decides to unilaterally censor things, then yes, I think they can be considered the bad guys, it's simply not their job to be the moral police. What they did last year is exactly why we need more time and money invested in things like the EFF, Tails, tor, wireguard, etc, so that we cannot be held hostage by RSP's who want to virtual signal with a variant of 'think of the children'.

*edit* also roll on DNS over HTTPS so they can never pull a stunt like last year again.

Lias:

 

I can't speak for the OP but I consider an RSP's job is to provide an unfiltered, uncensored connection to the internet unless its customers explicitly opt in to censorship. When RSPs decides to unilaterally censor things, then yes, I think they can be considered the bad guys, it's simply not their job to be the moral police. What they did last year is exactly why we need more time and money invested in things like the EFF, Tails, tor, wireguard, etc, so that we cannot be held hostage by RSP's who want to virtual signal with a variant of 'think of the children'.

 

*edit* also roll on DNS over HTTPS so they can never pull a stunt like last year again.

 

This isn't an Iran or China style block-list of "disagreeable" sites we are talking about here, this is sites dealing with child exploitation and acts of cruelty. And I imagine that the DIA provides, so arguably they are complying with the law. Stop tilting at windmills.

You don't think it is just? Take it up with the DIA.

Lias:

I can't speak for the OP but I consider an RSP's job is to provide an unfiltered, uncensored connection to the internet unless its customers explicitly opt in to censorship. When RSPs decides to unilaterally censor things, then yes, I think they can be considered the bad guys, it's simply not their job to be the moral police. What they did last year is exactly why we need more time and money invested in things like the EFF, Tails, tor, wireguard, etc, so that we cannot be held hostage by RSP's who want to virtual signal with a variant of 'think of the children'.

*edit* also roll on DNS over HTTPS so they can never pull a stunt like last year again.

 

ShinyChrome:

 

Lias:

 

I can't speak for the OP but I consider an RSP's job is to provide an unfiltered, uncensored connection to the internet unless its customers explicitly opt in to censorship. When RSPs decides to unilaterally censor things, then yes, I think they can be considered the bad guys, it's simply not their job to be the moral police. What they did last year is exactly why we need more time and money invested in things like the EFF, Tails, tor, wireguard, etc, so that we cannot be held hostage by RSP's who want to virtual signal with a variant of 'think of the children'.

 

*edit* also roll on DNS over HTTPS so they can never pull a stunt like last year again.

 

 

This isn't an Iran or China style block-list of "disagreeable" sites we are talking about here, this is sites dealing with child exploitation and acts of cruelty. And I imagine that the DIA provides, so arguably they are complying with the law. Stop tilting at windmills.

 

You don't think it is just? Take it up with the DIA.

 

We're not talking about the DIA list which is its own separate disagreement, we're talking about the RSP's unilaterally cutting off a swathe of popular internet sites last year because they were hosting the mosque video.

chevrolux: 

 

God that's an idiotic take on things....

If you want to look at videos of people being murdered, jump on TOR.

You are welcome to disagree with me, we live in a free society and I certainly disagree with what the RSPs did, but I'd hope you are at least able to comprehend why some peoples trust in RSPs was eroded by their actions last year. 

As for murder videos, not really my cup of tea, but given the notoriety and volumes of traffic sites like Dan's Gallery of the Grotesque, Stileproject and Bestgore have achieved, clearly they are for plenty of people. In my view, Joe Blogs should be able to browse whatever he wants without it being policed by his RSP. If Mr Blogs wants to visit overseas VOD sites, the pirate bay, the nambla forums, bestgore, or a furry porn website, that's not their concern. Why should Mr Blogs have to gain sufficient technical knowledge to bypass their blocking? While I'm no fan of the DIA list mentioned above, at least that comes from the government who some would argue have the right to censor its citizen, however last year our RSPs decided to play judge jury and executioner.