this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2026
249 points (97.3% liked)

Selfhosted

63050 readers
1057 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] BlackSwan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Routers are usually hardware level optimized for throughput, filtering is inherently computationally expensive compared to routing (not crazy expensive just more than usually fits an FPGA), especially if you have to keep up multi-gigabit throughput

You could totally do it at the router, it would just become a more expensive piece of hardware and most people choose to cheap out

[–] cron@feddit.org 3 points 23 hours ago

I doubt a DNS filter would noticeably increase CPU usage. We’re not talking about deep packet inspection here.