• lemmyvore@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      This older comment explains how ECH works.

      ECH is technically unrelated to DoH, ECH is a HTTP extension not a DNS extension. But it uses the DoH encryption because it can’t use the HTTP encryption because of the chicken-and-egg problem explained in that comment, so… it basically latched onto DoH as a solution and in doing that tied the two together.

      And to answer your question, DoH is usable on its own without ECH because ECH is not needed for DNS. But ECH is strongly desirable for HTTP, and it also requires DoH, so that’s why Mozilla for example activated then as a package deal in Firefox (both or neither).

      • LWD@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        So DoH alone encrypts the DNS request which could reveal the intended domain, and ECH does likewise but for the initial HTTP request? Maybe I’m thick, but to me it sounds like DoH without ECH is insufficient?

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          In a sense yeah, you want ECH too. It’s just that ECH makes up for a HTTP-specific fault. DNS is used for more than HTTP; if you’re not using HTTP then DoH is enough.