I signed up and saw they only allowed a single subdomain for DDNS, with docs saying to contact support if you needed more. I emailed asking for just 1 more subdomain and support told me that for my usecase I should just use CloudFlare.
When I last tried deSEC, the service was reliable and well worth the price of admission, but the web UI and API were both quite rough, and propagation tended to be quite slow. It was annoying to do an ACME DNS01 challenge on it, for example. IIRC, the API didn't have a complete set of replace/edit endpoints, so even DNSControl (https://github.com/DNSControl/dnscontrol) would leave records nonexistent for a while while during updates.
As an aside (though this certainly applies to deSEC) it's strange to me how so many DNS services (free or paid) struggle to import simple Bind zone files, often either giving a vague error ("one or more records could not be imported"), mangling records, or even just silently omitting records. Parsing a zone file has some gotchas, but it doesn't seem like it should be that hard.
Recently migrated to deSEC, great experience so far, except for hitting the API rate limit when using Tofu to plan and apply changes with around a 100 domains. For now I'm using `-parallelism=1` which seems to work.
> We found deSEC to be the only affordable DNS supplier in the EU that complies with state of the art secure DNSSEC.
I mean, if your definition of "affordable" is free, then sure.
But for the record there are other affordable EU suppliers who do DNSSEC:
- Bunny DNS[0] is "free" – i.e. only subject to their minimum $1/month account spend fee.
- RcodeZero is very affordable[1] plus added bonus it is run by the `.at` registry so the infrastructure is solid – business customers only, no private individuals
- Netnod (only via resellers[2] unless you are a big company or government) – Netnod host the I Root Servers and their public hosting DNSSEC service will soon feature HSM-bound DNSSEC keys
I happen to run an affordable EU supplier who does DNSSEC, and also AXFR (incoming and outgoing). I offer a free plan from time to time, but not at the moment to preserve resources for paying customer.
After recent US shenanigans why would you spend effort to migrate to yet another Five Eyes controlled service, especially if they do the full "privacy from Germany" circus.
What kind of security threat does a migration to such a service actually mitigate?
If they were truly a "sovereign EU" kind of project then they'd be on .eu domain, not have security advisors from Virginia, and so on.
Nevertheless it's good to see that the decoupling-from-your-allies movement that US citizens have initiated is so scary that they have to set up these kind of fake EU alternatives with some local figureheads.
Unbound is caching, not authoritative. Zones with dns records are served from authoritative DNS servers such as bind. Unbound asks authoritative servers for records and caches them locally, giving faster response and reducing load on authoritative servers.
I signed up and saw they only allowed a single subdomain for DDNS, with docs saying to contact support if you needed more. I emailed asking for just 1 more subdomain and support told me that for my usecase I should just use CloudFlare.
So I did. No silly miniscule restrictions.
Similar story: asked for an increase and got told
> […] our mission is to improve Internet security by increasing the adoption of DNSSEC. [We therefore expect users to enable DNSSEC for their domains.
> Would you be willing to do that?
Wanting to increase the adoption of DNSSEC is fair, but couldn’t this be all self-serve? It’s almost as if they don’t want people to use them.
When I last tried deSEC, the service was reliable and well worth the price of admission, but the web UI and API were both quite rough, and propagation tended to be quite slow. It was annoying to do an ACME DNS01 challenge on it, for example. IIRC, the API didn't have a complete set of replace/edit endpoints, so even DNSControl (https://github.com/DNSControl/dnscontrol) would leave records nonexistent for a while while during updates.
As an aside (though this certainly applies to deSEC) it's strange to me how so many DNS services (free or paid) struggle to import simple Bind zone files, often either giving a vague error ("one or more records could not be imported"), mangling records, or even just silently omitting records. Parsing a zone file has some gotchas, but it doesn't seem like it should be that hard.
Recently migrated to deSEC, great experience so far, except for hitting the API rate limit when using Tofu to plan and apply changes with around a 100 domains. For now I'm using `-parallelism=1` which seems to work.
We found deSEC to be the only affordable DNS supplier in the EU that complies with state of the art secure DNSSEC. Highly recommended.
DNSSEC support is an anti-feature, it is dead/dying and the faster we can unburden ourselves from it the faster we can move on to better solutions.
https://sockpuppet.org/blog/2015/01/15/against-dnssec/
Why do you think DNS should be open to MITM attackers? Do you work for the NSA?
> We found deSEC to be the only affordable DNS supplier in the EU that complies with state of the art secure DNSSEC.
I mean, if your definition of "affordable" is free, then sure.
But for the record there are other affordable EU suppliers who do DNSSEC:
[0] https://bunny.net/dns/ [1] https://www.rcodezero.at/solutions/enterprise [2] https://www.netnod.se/dns/find-a-partnerI happen to run an affordable EU supplier who does DNSSEC, and also AXFR (incoming and outgoing). I offer a free plan from time to time, but not at the moment to preserve resources for paying customer.
https://www.ptrdns.net/
One who doesn't is frustratingly Hetzner.
Seems legit, but how can I trust them to survive if they're not collecting revenue?
Some of them are located in Virginia, don't worry they'll be funded forever.
Does not support AXFR :(
That's a bummer.
It looks like they are open to adding the feature and open to outside contributions: https://github.com/desec-io/desec-stack/issues/579
After recent US shenanigans why would you spend effort to migrate to yet another Five Eyes controlled service, especially if they do the full "privacy from Germany" circus.
What kind of security threat does a migration to such a service actually mitigate?
If they were truly a "sovereign EU" kind of project then they'd be on .eu domain, not have security advisors from Virginia, and so on.
Nevertheless it's good to see that the decoupling-from-your-allies movement that US citizens have initiated is so scary that they have to set up these kind of fake EU alternatives with some local figureheads.
Just use unbound
Completely different thing
What is this if not a DNS service?
Unbound is caching, not authoritative. Zones with dns records are served from authoritative DNS servers such as bind. Unbound asks authoritative servers for records and caches them locally, giving faster response and reducing load on authoritative servers.
Just use bind :)