Micro-level view: I'm a sysadmin for my Customers, my family, and some of my friends. Inevitably I will have to deal with these awful devices. So will countless other sysadmins. I'm dreading having to deal with devices that invade my users' privacy, thwart my attempts at detecting bad actors on the network, and that just generally act like the person who paid for them doesn't actually own them.
There's so much that Mozilla could do structurally, but they are terrified of rocking the boat or disrupting their corporate underwriters.
Just like earlier today, with their anti malicious javascript features[1]; they could look into empowering the users and changing the structure of how js is run in the browser. But that might threaten advertisers, so instead they opted for a clumsly blacklisting solution instead.
If you want an accurate heuristic for predicting Mozilla's behavior, just ask "What would Google want?". It may not be Google in particular that these decisions benefit, but they absolutely benefit those entities that are locking down and siloing the internet.
More here: https://knowledgebase.paloaltonetworks.com/KCSArticleDetail?...
How so? It looks to me like it makes it easier for bad actors to take advantage of my network, by making it harder to detect and block DNS lookups.
Because by making this the default, they are helping centralize the internet and greatly benefiting the entrenched powers while putting barriers to entry for the rest of us.
That would be nice in an ideal world, unfortunately most of us live in reality.
