The wiki doesn't say how to get a DNS stamp

[ell1e]

The wiki just mentions this for the "DNS stamps" on the configuration starting page: https://github.com/DNSCrypt/dnscrypt-proxy/wiki/Configuration

A DNS Stamp is a string that encodes all the required parameters to connect to a server. Its IP address and/or name, the protocol to use, some cryptographic keys and other information.

Perhaps I'm missing something, but this doesn't actually seem to tell me anything useful on how to get this information.

When specifying DNS over HTTPS servers in browsers, it's typically a URL and not a stamp, e.g. https://dns.mullvad.net or similar. There doesn't seem to be any information on the configuration page on how to use a server like that, which seems like a problem since that appears to be the usual format on how these servers are presented to the user.

[ell1e]

After some more consideration, I think this might be important to be able to do for security reasons, because right now it seems like if an attacker gets access to the dnscrypt.info server then all DNS traffic by dnscrypt-proxy world-wide can be intercepted. Correct me if I'm wrong. (I realize that somebody could also try to mess with the source code, but I assume that has a longer lead time until it reaches the users if e.g. they install the program from a Linux distribution's packages. The public lists however seem to be fed into the programs directly.)

The only prevention mechanism to make this more decentralized seems to be to use your own DNS stamps and bypass the sources list. The wiki doesn't really say how to do that.

[ell1e]

I found the stamp calculator now: https://dnscrypt.info/stamps/

I would suggest this calculator should probably be mentioned right after this paragraph:

A DNS Stamp is a string that encodes all the required parameters to connect to a server. Its IP address and/or name, the protocol to use, some cryptographic keys and other information.

Sadly, the calculator doesn't really seem to say what key format is expected for the public key, and doesn't seem to check that the public key is somehow coherent either which would be nice.