PublicDNS.info Live-tested public DNS
Retested every 72 hours.

DNS Privacy Score by Country

How private and secure is DNS infrastructure in your country? Ranked by DNSSEC adoption, hijacking rates, and resolver reliability. Updated .

These scores are calculated from live probe data โ€” not self-reported claims. We test 150 countries with 10+ resolvers each, drawn from a database of 109,644+ servers probed every 72 hours. The score reflects real, measured behaviour of DNS infrastructure in each country.

DNSSEC Rate (25 pts)

Percentage of resolvers that validate DNSSEC signatures, protecting against DNS spoofing.

Hijacking-Free (25 pts)

Percentage of resolvers returning proper NXDOMAIN instead of redirecting to ISP ad/search pages.

Reliability (25 pts)

Average uptime reliability of live resolvers, measured by our 72-hour probe cycle.

Encrypted DNS (25 pts)

Estimated availability of DNS-over-HTTPS and DNS-over-TLS among the country's resolvers.

Top 10 Most Privacy-Friendly DNS Countries

Ranked by composite privacy score across DNSSEC, hijacking, reliability, and encrypted DNS.

  1. Bangladesh
    98 / 100
    A
  2. Dominican Republic
    98 / 100
    A
  3. United States
    97 / 100
    A
  4. Canada
    97 / 100
    A
  5. Netherlands
    97 / 100
    A
  6. Ecuador
    97 / 100
    A
  7. Finland
    97 / 100
    A
  8. France
    96 / 100
    A
  9. Germany
    96 / 100
    A
  10. United Kingdom
    96 / 100
    A

Full Country Rankings

DNS privacy scores for 150 countries, sortable by rank, score, DNSSEC adoption, hijacking rates, reliability, encrypted DNS, and grade
Rank Country Score DNSSEC % Hijack-Free % Reliability % Encrypted % Grade
1 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฉ Bangladesh 98 98.5% 100% 94.2% 83.8% A
2 ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ด Dominican Republic 98 98.6% 100% 94.3% 83.9% A
3 ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ธ United States 97 95.8% 99.1% 95.6% 81.6% A
4 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Canada 97 95.9% 99.5% 95.4% 81.7% A
5 ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Netherlands 97 96.7% 99.6% 95.3% 82.4% A
6 ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡จ Ecuador 97 96% 100% 93.7% 81.8% A
7 ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Finland 97 96% 100% 95.4% 81.8% A
8 ๐Ÿ‡ซ๐Ÿ‡ท France 96 93.3% 99.5% 95.3% 79.6% A
9 ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ช Germany 96 92.7% 99.6% 95.4% 79.2% A
10 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง United Kingdom 96 94.4% 99.7% 95.1% 80.5% A
11 ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฆ South Africa 96 94.9% 100% 93.2% 80.9% A
12 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ช Sweden 96 95.5% 97.4% 95.3% 81.4% A
13 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Czechia 95 91.1% 100% 94.7% 77.9% A
14 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ท Brazil 94 90.3% 99.3% 94.4% 77.2% A
15 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡บ Australia 94 90.5% 99.4% 95.2% 77.4% A
16 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฝ Mexico 93 88.8% 99.5% 94.1% 76% A
17 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ญ Switzerland 93 89.4% 96.1% 95% 76.5% A
18 ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡น Italy 93 87.5% 100% 94.5% 75% A
19 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ท Argentina 93 89.2% 99.4% 92.8% 76.4% A
20 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ท Greece 93 88.4% 100% 91.9% 75.7% A
21 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡น Austria 93 90% 95% 94.6% 77% A
22 ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ช Venezuela 92 86.9% 100% 92.1% 74.5% A
23 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ธ Palestine 92 85.7% 100% 93.7% 73.6% A
24 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Singapore 91 83.8% 99% 95.7% 72% A
25 ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฉ Indonesia 91 83.3% 99.6% 92.7% 71.6% A
26 ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡พ Libya 91 84.2% 100% 92.7% 72.4% A
27 ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ท Turkiye 91 84.2% 98.2% 94.8% 72.4% A
28 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ช United Arab Emirates 91 82.6% 100% 94.2% 71.1% A
29 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Saudi Arabia 91 84.6% 96.2% 95.6% 72.7% A
30 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ด Colombia 90 80.9% 100% 93.6% 69.7% A
31 ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Ukraine 90 80.6% 99.5% 93.1% 69.5% A
32 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฑ Poland 89 78.7% 99.7% 94.2% 68% A
33 ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ต Japan 89 77.8% 100% 95.4% 67.2% A
34 ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ณ India 89 78.5% 100% 94.6% 67.8% A
35 ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Hong Kong 89 80.7% 95.1% 94.8% 69.6% A
36 ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ธ Spain 89 79.1% 100% 94.2% 68.3% A
37 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡พ Cyprus 89 80.7% 98.2% 93% 69.6% A
38 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ช Belgium 89 78% 100% 95.5% 67.4% A
39 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡น Guatemala 88 76.6% 99.1% 92.7% 66.3% A
40 ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ด Romania 88 77.3% 96.9% 94.9% 66.8% A
41 ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฟ New Zealand 88 81.5% 90.7% 94.4% 70.2% A
42 ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ป Latvia 88 76.2% 100% 94.5% 66% A
43 ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ช Estonia 88 85.2% 85.2% 93.2% 73.2% A
44 ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡น Lithuania 87 74.7% 100% 94.4% 64.8% A
45 ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ด Norway 87 76.1% 95.7% 96% 65.9% A
46 ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Israel 87 74.4% 100% 94.5% 64.5% A
47 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฐ Pakistan 87 73.7% 100% 93.5% 64% A
48 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฉ Andorra 87 73.9% 100% 93.5% 64.1% A
49 ๐Ÿ‡พ๐Ÿ‡ช Yemen 87 75% 100% 94.1% 65% A
50 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ช Peru 86 71.4% 100% 93.5% 62.1% A
51 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡พ Malaysia 86 74.1% 97.6% 94.9% 64.3% A
52 ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ณ Honduras 86 72.7% 100% 91.8% 63.2% A
53 ๐Ÿ‡ด๐Ÿ‡ฒ Oman 86 70.3% 100% 95% 61.2% A
54 ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ธ Serbia 85 71.7% 98.1% 93.5% 62.4% A
55 ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ช Ireland 85 73.1% 92.3% 94.4% 63.5% A
56 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡พ Belarus 84 68% 100% 93.4% 59.4% A
57 ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ญ Thailand 83 63.8% 100% 94.7% 56% A
58 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฌ Bulgaria 83 64.9% 100% 93.7% 56.9% A
59 ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡บ Hungary 83 64.4% 100% 94.2% 56.5% A
60 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฒ Armenia 83 69.2% 92.3% 93.5% 60.4% A
61 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ท Costa Rica 82 64.6% 97.9% 92.4% 56.7% A
62 ๐Ÿ‡ฉ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Denmark 82 64.8% 96.3% 94.8% 56.8% A
63 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ท Puerto Rico 82 64.2% 98.1% 94.4% 56.4% A
64 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Slovakia 82 62.8% 100% 93.9% 55.2% A
65 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฉ Moldova 82 62.5% 100% 94.6% 55% A
66 ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ผ Taiwan 81 64.5% 94.6% 94.5% 56.6% A
67 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Albania 81 61.4% 100% 93.4% 54.1% A
68 ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ณ Vietnam 79 56.8% 100% 94.1% 50.4% B
69 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡พ Paraguay 78 54.7% 100% 93.7% 48.8% B
70 ๐Ÿ‡ญ๐Ÿ‡ท Croatia 78 53.7% 100% 95.5% 48% B
71 ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ณ Tunisia 78 60.6% 90.9% 93.5% 53.5% B
72 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฑ Chile 77 52.5% 100% 93.5% 47% B
73 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡น Portugal 77 58% 88% 94.6% 51.4% B
74 ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ฒ Zambia 77 54.2% 100% 91.9% 48.4% B
75 ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ท South Korea 76 50.2% 97.4% 95.4% 45.2% B
76 ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Kazakhstan 76 50% 100% 93.2% 45% B
77 ๐Ÿ‡ฟ๐Ÿ‡ผ Zimbabwe 76 52.4% 97.6% 91.8% 46.9% B
78 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฉ DR Congo 76 52.9% 97.1% 92.5% 47.3% B
79 ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ผ Rwanda 76 50% 100% 92.4% 45% B
80 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Slovenia 76 50% 100% 94% 45% B
81 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ช Georgia 76 50% 100% 93.2% 45% B
82 ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡บ Russia 75 48.4% 99.6% 93.4% 43.7% B
83 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Mozambique 75 50% 100% 91.4% 45% B
84 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ป El Salvador 74 56.9% 86.2% 88.4% 50.5% B
85 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ฉ Sudan 74 50% 92.9% 92.3% 45% B
86 ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ช Kenya 73 49.2% 90.2% 93.3% 44.4% B
87 ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡บ Luxembourg 73 46.4% 92.9% 95.4% 42.1% B
88 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡พ Guyana 73 42.9% 100% 93.6% 39.3% B
89 ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Nigeria 72 40.7% 100% 93.1% 37.6% B
90 ๐Ÿ‡ฝ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Kosovo 72 41.3% 100% 92.5% 38% B
91 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡บ Mauritius 72 41.2% 100% 92.8% 38% B
92 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ด Somalia 71 43.8% 93.8% 91.2% 40% B
93 ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Uzbekistan 70 39.1% 95.7% 93.9% 36.3% B
94 ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Namibia 70 40% 97.1% 92.5% 37% B
95 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ถ Equatorial Guinea 70 38.1% 100% 92.3% 35.5% B
96 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ญ Philippines 69 33% 100% 95% 31.4% B
97 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ณ Mongolia 69 36.2% 100% 92.4% 34% B
98 ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ธ Iceland 69 42.5% 85% 94.9% 39% B
99 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฆ Bosnia and Herzegovina 69 40% 93.3% 92.3% 37% B
100 ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Nicaragua 67 33.3% 93.9% 92.1% 31.6% B
101 ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ฒ Jamaica 67 30% 100% 93.9% 29% B
102 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฒ Cameroon 67 32% 100% 89.9% 30.6% B
103 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Madagascar 67 30% 100% 93.1% 29% B
104 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ฟ Azerbaijan 66 27.7% 100% 95.3% 27.2% B
105 ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Kyrgyzstan 66 29.8% 100% 92% 28.8% B
106 ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฆ Laos 65 29.3% 94.8% 92.7% 28.4% B
107 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ด Angola 65 26.8% 97.6% 91.9% 26.4% B
108 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ช Montenegro 65 27.6% 100% 91.6% 27.1% B
109 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฏ Benin 65 27.3% 100% 92.5% 26.8% B
110 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฌ Papua New Guinea 65 25% 100% 93.4% 25% B
111 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡บ Guam 65 46.7% 66.7% 87.9% 42.4% B
112 ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ฐ Sri Lanka 65 36.4% 81.8% 93.1% 34.1% B
113 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ด Bolivia 64 23.1% 100% 92.8% 23.5% C
114 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Republic of the Congo 64 24.3% 100% 93.6% 24.4% C
115 ๐Ÿ‡ต๐Ÿ‡ฆ Panama 64 29% 90.3% 93% 28.2% C
116 ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฌ Togo 64 23.1% 100% 92.8% 23.5% C
117 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฒ Myanmar 63 24.3% 96.1% 92.3% 24.4% C
118 ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฟ Tanzania 63 26.4% 90.6% 92.4% 26.1% C
119 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ฐ North Macedonia 63 22% 98% 94.3% 22.6% C
120 ๐Ÿ‡ฎ๐Ÿ‡ถ Iraq 63 20.5% 100% 94.6% 21.4% C
121 ๐Ÿ‡ฑ๐Ÿ‡ง Lebanon 63 29.4% 85.3% 94.9% 28.5% C
122 ๐Ÿ‡ท๐Ÿ‡ช Rรฉunion 63 20% 100% 93.9% 21% C
123 ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡ฌ Uganda 62 23.3% 91.3% 92.6% 23.6% C
124 ๐Ÿ‡ฆ๐Ÿ‡ซ Afghanistan 62 19.8% 100% 92.8% 20.8% C
125 ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡ต Nepal 62 20.7% 98.8% 92.6% 21.6% C
126 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ซ Burkina Faso 62 20% 100% 93.2% 21% C
127 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ง Barbados 62 18.8% 100% 92.7% 20% C
128 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡จ Seychelles 62 30% 80% 94.1% 29% C
129 ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ญ Cambodia 61 25.2% 87% 91.5% 25.2% C
130 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ผ Botswana 61 18.8% 97.9% 93.5% 20% C
131 ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡น Trinidad and Tobago 61 17.4% 95.7% 95.5% 18.9% C
132 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ณ Guinea 61 17.6% 100% 90.4% 19.1% C
133 ๐Ÿ‡น๐Ÿ‡ฏ Tajikistan 60 15.1% 100% 91.8% 17.1% C
134 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ญ Bahrain 60 16.7% 96.7% 94.4% 18.4% C
135 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ด Macau 60 20% 90% 94.5% 21% C
136 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡น Bhutan 60 15.8% 100% 91.3% 17.6% C
137 ๐Ÿ‡บ๐Ÿ‡พ Uruguay 60 16.7% 94.4% 94.8% 18.4% C
138 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ญ Ghana 59 17.1% 93.4% 91.8% 18.7% C
139 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ฎ Ivory Coast 59 12.5% 100% 91.6% 15% C
140 ๐Ÿ‡จ๐Ÿ‡ณ China 59 13.3% 93.3% 98% 15.6% C
141 ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฌ Egypt 58 36.2% 53.2% 91.9% 34% C
142 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ซ French Guiana 58 14.3% 92.9% 92.6% 16.4% C
143 ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฟ Belize 57 7.1% 100% 94.6% 10.7% C
144 ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ด Jordan 54 13.5% 78.4% 93% 15.8% C
145 ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ผ Malawi 54 2.9% 100% 90.4% 7.3% C
146 ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡จ New Caledonia 54 2.9% 97.1% 93.4% 7.3% C
147 ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ผ Kuwait 53 9.7% 83.9% 92.9% 12.8% C
148 ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ธ South Sudan 53 0% 100% 92.8% 5% C
149 ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ต Guadeloupe 51 4.5% 81.8% 94.2% 8.6% C
150 ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ฌ British Virgin Islands 40 10.7% 28.6% 91.9% 13.6% D

Data reflects probe results as of March 2026. Only countries with 10+ live-tested resolvers are included. Encrypted DNS % is estimated from DNSSEC adoption correlation.

Countries with Significant DNS Privacy Concerns

  • ๐Ÿ‡ป๐Ÿ‡ฌ British Virgin Islands (Score: 40/100, Grade D) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (10.7%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ต Guadeloupe (Score: 51/100, Grade C) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (4.5%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ธ๐Ÿ‡ธ South Sudan (Score: 53/100, Grade C) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (0%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ฐ๐Ÿ‡ผ Kuwait (Score: 53/100, Grade C) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (9.7%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ณ๐Ÿ‡จ New Caledonia (Score: 54/100, Grade C) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (2.9%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ฒ๐Ÿ‡ผ Malawi (Score: 54/100, Grade C) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (2.9%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ฏ๐Ÿ‡ด Jordan (Score: 54/100, Grade C) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (13.5%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ง๐Ÿ‡ฟ Belize (Score: 57/100, Grade C) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (7.1%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ซ French Guiana (Score: 58/100, Grade C) โ€” Very low DNSSEC adoption (14.3%), leaving users vulnerable to DNS spoofing.
  • ๐Ÿ‡ช๐Ÿ‡ฌ Egypt (Score: 58/100, Grade C) โ€” Significant NXDOMAIN hijacking detected among resolvers.

Why DNS Privacy Varies by Country

DNS privacy is not a universal standard. The quality and security of a country's DNS infrastructure depends on a complex interplay of government regulation, ISP commercial incentives, technical capacity, and user awareness. Countries with strong data protection laws โ€” like those in the European Union under GDPR โ€” tend to have higher DNSSEC adoption and less DNS hijacking, because regulators actively discourage practices that compromise user privacy.

In contrast, many ISPs in countries with weaker privacy regulation practise NXDOMAIN hijacking, replacing standard error responses with their own search or advertising pages. This generates revenue for the ISP but exposes users to tracking and breaks applications that rely on correct DNS error handling. Some governments mandate DNS-level content filtering, which structurally reduces privacy scores because resolvers are configured to intercept and modify responses rather than pass them through faithfully.

The good news is that individual users are not bound by their country's DNS infrastructure. Switching to a public encrypted DNS provider like Cloudflare (1.1.1.1) or Quad9 (9.9.9.9) takes minutes and immediately bypasses ISP DNS regardless of where you are located. Enabling DNS-over-HTTPS in your browser or DNS-over-TLS on your device encrypts your queries, preventing ISPs from monitoring or modifying them even if local infrastructure is poor.

This data was collected by our automated probe infrastructure, which tests every resolver in our database on a 72-hour cycle from Europe. Each resolver receives a standard A-record query, a NXDOMAIN hijacking test, and a DNSSEC validation check using dnssec-failed.org. Scores are calculated from the aggregate results. Limitations include geographic bias in latency measurements (probes originate from Europe), thinner IPv6 coverage, and the possibility that some resolvers behave differently under load or for specific query types.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does the DNS privacy score measure?

The score combines four metrics: DNSSEC validation rate (how many resolvers verify cryptographic signatures), hijacking-free rate (how many resolvers return proper NXDOMAIN errors instead of redirecting to ad pages), resolver reliability (average uptime), and estimated encrypted DNS availability (DoH/DoT support). Each metric is worth 25 points for a maximum of 100.

Why does my country score poorly?

Low scores typically result from ISPs that practice NXDOMAIN hijacking (redirecting failed lookups to search/ad pages), low DNSSEC adoption among local resolvers, or unreliable DNS infrastructure. Government-mandated DNS filtering can also reduce scores if resolvers are configured to block or redirect queries.

Does a high country score mean my DNS is private?

Not necessarily. The country score reflects the overall DNS infrastructure, not your personal configuration. Even in a high-scoring country, your specific ISP may still hijack DNS or lack DNSSEC. Use our DNS Privacy Check tool to test your actual DNS setup.

Which country has the best DNS privacy?

Nordic countries (Finland, Sweden, Iceland) and Western European nations (Germany, Netherlands, Switzerland) consistently score highest due to strong DNSSEC adoption, minimal hijacking, and reliable infrastructure. However, individual users in any country can achieve excellent privacy by using a public encrypted DNS provider.

What is DNSSEC and why does it matter for privacy?

DNSSEC adds cryptographic signatures to DNS records, preventing attackers from forging responses and redirecting you to malicious sites. While DNSSEC primarily provides integrity rather than confidentiality, it is a fundamental building block of DNS security. Resolvers that validate DNSSEC are also more likely to support modern privacy features like encrypted DNS.

How often is this data updated?

Our probe infrastructure tests every resolver in the database on a 72-hour cycle. The country scores on this page are recalculated from the latest probe data and cached for one hour. The scores reflect real, measured behaviour โ€” not self-reported claims by ISPs or governments.

Can I improve my DNS privacy regardless of my country's score?

Yes. Switch to a privacy-focused public DNS provider like Cloudflare (1.1.1.1), Quad9 (9.9.9.9), or Google (8.8.8.8) with encrypted DNS enabled (DoH or DoT). This bypasses your ISP's DNS entirely, regardless of your country's infrastructure quality.

How is the encrypted DNS availability score calculated?

We estimate encrypted DNS availability using DNSSEC adoption as a proxy indicator, since resolvers that validate DNSSEC are significantly more likely to also support DNS-over-HTTPS (DoH) and DNS-over-TLS (DoT). Direct DoT probing (port 853) data is incorporated where available. This is an approximation and we are expanding direct encrypted DNS testing coverage.

Related