←back to thread

1895 points _l4jh | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.422s | source
1. Angostura ◴[] No.16730804[source]
I see a lot of criticism of the choice of KPMG.

Who should they have chosen as auditors? And which is the better fast privacy-minded DNS service I should be using?

replies(1): >>16730833 #
2. colordrops ◴[] No.16730833[source]
Maybe they could do some form of auditing that is traceable by the average consumer. For instance:

They could make their deployment setup completely automated and publish the tooling to github, and have video evidence of them deploying the same SHA-256 stamped tooling to their data centers. They could expose operational details and transactions on their DNS servers as far as possible without revealing identifiable information. They could have regular physical audits by a constantly rotating set of well known and trusted parties (i.e. EFF, Mozilla).