Improve the comparison with Pi-hole in the README.

DandelionSprout commented 1 month ago

Prerequisites

[X] I have checked the Wiki and Discussions and found no answer
[X] I have searched other issues and found no duplicates
[X] I want to request a feature or enhancement and not ask a question

The problem

I've noticed that there's still a lot of people on the internet who still think Pi-hole is any good, so I'm proposing adding additional info to https://github.com/AdguardTeam/AdGuardHome#comparison-pi-hole to cover additional details.

Clarifying the "Cross-platform" row (The most important part of these proposals).
Added info on AGH being able to block by IP and CIDR entries.
Added 1 mention of DNS-over-QUIC support.

Proposed solution

Change:

| Cross-platform                                                          | ✅                | ❌ (not natively, only via Docker)                        |
| Running as a DNS-over-HTTPS or DNS-over-TLS server                      | ✅                | ❌ (requires additional software)                         |
| Blocking phishing and malware domains                                   | ✅                | ❌ (requires non-default blocklists)                      |
| Parental control (blocking adult domains)                               | ✅                | ❌ (requires non-default blocklists)                      |
| Force Safe search on search engines                                     | ✅                | ❌                                                        |
| Per-client (device) configuration                                       | ✅                | ✅                                                        |
| Access settings (choose who can use AGH DNS)                            | ✅                | ❌                                                        |
| Running [without root privileges][wiki-noroot]                          | ✅                | ❌                                                        |

↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓

| Cross-platform, including Windows and macOS                             | ✅                | ❌ (not natively, only via Docker)                        |
| Running as a DNS-over-HTTPS, DNS-over-TLS, or DNS-over-QUIC server      | ✅                | ❌ (requires additional software)                         |
| Blocking phishing and malware domains                                   | ✅                | ❌ (requires non-default blocklists)                      |
| Parental control (blocking adult domains)                               | ✅                | ❌ (requires non-default blocklists)                      |
| Force Safe search on search engines                                     | ✅                | ❌                                                        |
| Per-client (device) configuration                                       | ✅                | ✅                                                        |
| Access settings (choose who can use AGH DNS)                            | ✅                | ❌                                                        |
| Running [without root privileges][wiki-noroot]                          | ✅                | ❌                                                        |
| Blocking ads and trackers with IP address rules                         | ✅                | ❌                                                        |
| Blocking ads and trackers by CNAME                                      | ✅                | ❌                                                        |

Alternatives considered and additional information

No alternatives that I am currently aware of.

SukkaW commented 1 month ago

Though AdGuardHome is more powerful in blocking, Pi-Hole is more powerful in statistics:

The merged chart shows the ratio clearly. Also per client activity.

And statistics with a selectable time range.

Also, Pi-Hole supports User Groups and Permission, which is essential to Enterprise management. Gotta put that in the comparison as well then.

realyukii commented 3 weeks ago

After looking at the comparison, I saw features such as Force Safe search on search engines. How does it work?

SukkaW commented 3 weeks ago

After looking at the comparison, I saw features such as Force Safe search on search engines. How does it work?

Force all Google's domain's resolution to CNAME forcesafesearch.google.com, see https://support.google.com/websearch/answer/186669

This also works for YouTube with either CNAME restrictmoderate.youtube.com or CNAME restrict.youtube.com, see https://support.google.com/a/answer/6214622

Bing supports CNAME strict.bing.com, see https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/topic/blocking-adult-content-with-safesearch-or-blocking-chat-946059ed-992b-46a0-944a-28e8fb8f1814

DuckDuckGo supports CNAME safe.duckduckgo.com, see https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/features/safe-search/

Yandex provides an IP instead of CNAME, so AdGuardHome would use A 213.180.193.56, see https://yandex.com/support/search/schoolsearch.html

And I suppose many other search engines will also have this function implemented.

Also, AdGuardHome will block known third-party search engine proxy services (like popular searx instances) to prevent search through those services.

realyukii commented 3 weeks ago

First time heard about it, thanks for the detailed explanation! :)

AdguardTeam / AdGuardHome