This, in conjunction with greater limitations on plugins for ad-blocking, seems like a bit of a longer term play to “keep serving ads” at all cost. Hopefully I’m wrong about this being a longer term play, and chrome/google will also support the “use-application-dns.net” method1 for disabling DoH, or simply keep with what they have proposed in the article (enabling only when DoH and dns configuration intersects with a few chosen dns provides), so folks can keep using things like pi-hole if they choose.
Presumably you can run a DoH server on a pi-hole, right?
I’m not sure why you’d want to?
So you can connect clients that want to use DoH.
Not sure why I would need DoH on my switched (not a hub) home LAN to talk to my local pihole instance, when the native resolver works fine…but sure… Why not. Seems like that could be useful for some folks.
If, say, chrome were to decide to go DoH only for Security Reasons (tm)?
Of course you can. Or on a VPS you’re hosting something else on.
Your concern is addressed at the very beginning of the article. DoH will be enabled (at least for now) only for specific white-listed DNS providers who are known to support DoH. If you have configured a different DNS server, then regular port 53 will be used.
Additionally, there exists (at least for now) a flag to disable the feature.
My concern is not addressed, since it is about what chrome may do in the future.
Also, I did reference that part about the feature currently being enabled for intersection of chosen providers and configs in my comment already. Weird.