Having a state-approved DNS resolver is better than letting ISP and other private entities mess around with DNS. The current situation in many EU countries is that it is up to the ISPs to block unlawful/compromised domains, having an official EU resolver removes that burden from ISP, they now just have to point to that resolver. It will probably make it much easier for wi-fi hotspots, company networks, etc... to be in compliance, and it is better than relying on a third party that may have its own idea of what's acceptable, inject ads, etc...
Of course, it would be better without censorship, and some organizations are fighting for it, and it is a good thing. but the technical solution is not bad IMHO. And censorship will be circumvented anyways, DNS blocking is weak.
In summary:
- It doesn't make the current situation worse regarding censorship (DNS poisoning is already done at ISP level)
- It can keep ISPs in check
- Depending on how well it is run, it can be good for security (it implies good reactivity on the part of the EU, that's why I don't count on it)
Having a state-approved DNS resolver is better than letting ISP and other private entities mess around with DNS. The current situation in many EU countries is that it is up to the ISPs to block unlawful/compromised domains, having an official EU resolver removes that burden from ISP, they now just have to point to that resolver. It will probably make it much easier for wi-fi hotspots, company networks, etc... to be in compliance, and it is better than relying on a third party that may have its own idea of what's acceptable, inject ads, etc...
Of course, it would be better without censorship, and some organizations are fighting for it, and it is a good thing. but the technical solution is not bad IMHO. And censorship will be circumvented anyways, DNS blocking is weak.
In summary:
- It doesn't make the current situation worse regarding censorship (DNS poisoning is already done at ISP level)
- It can keep ISPs in check
- Depending on how well it is run, it can be good for security (it implies good reactivity on the part of the EU, that's why I don't count on it)