Why and why not?
Re: https://1.1.1.1/ The free app that makes your internet safer (and faster).
polonus
If you have something against free speach, then this might not be a company to deal with.
An interesting read,
https://www.fastcompany.com/90312063/how-cloudflare-straddles-its-role-as-privacy-champion-and-hate-speech-enabler
Yup interesting read. Accountability in today’s environment is worth paying attention too.
Thank you, bob3160,
Indeed a reason to treat such initiatives well-informed, and you take us to that right information through the link you provide for us all. Thanks for doing that. Let us stay at the right side of the stick then. 
The cloud can also be a two-sided sword.
See here: https://dnsviz.net/d/1.1.1.1.in-addr.arpa/dnssec/ (errors and alerts)
Errors (2) 1.-in-addr.arpa zone: The server(s) were not responsive to queries over UDP. (2001:ddd::53, 2620:38:2000::53) -in-addr.arpa zone: The server(s) were not responsive to queries over UDP. (2620:37:e000::53) Warnings (6) 1.-in-addr.arpa to -1.1.1.in-addr.arpa: The following NS name(s) were found in the authoritative NS RRset, but not in the delegation NS RRset (i.e., in the -1.in-addr.arpa zone): -mira.ns.cloudflare.com, -alec.ns.cloudflare.com 1.-in-addr.arpa to -1.1.1.in-addr.arpa: The following NS name(s) were found in the delegation NS RRset (i.e., in the -1.in-addr.arpa zone), but not in the authoritative NS RRset: -ns3.cloudflare.com, -ns7.cloudflare.com arpa/DS (alg 8, id 42581): DNSSEC specification prohibits signing with DS records that use digest algorithm 1 (SHA-1). arpa/DS (alg 8, id 42581): DNSSEC specification prohibits signing with DS records that use digest algorithm 1 (SHA-1). arpa/DS (alg 8, id 42581): DS records with digest type 1 (SHA-1) are ignored when DS records with digest type 2 (SHA-256) exist in the same RRset. arpa/DS (alg 8, id 42581): DS records with digest type 1 (SHA-1) are ignored when DS records with digest type 2 (SHA-256) exist in the same RRset. DNSKEY legend
One would trust a feasable ad-story at first sight, but looking real hard, I’d say no thank you for that offer.
Damian
If memory serves me well, you only have to search the forums for that IP and Cloudflare private DNS (or wording like that), causing issues with avasts ability to scan web content when this is used.
So, if my memory is correct, then far from making it safer you would be less safe.
Now that you mention it, you may very well be correct.
In short, no.
If you run a paid version of Avast you’re covered by RealSite.
For the free version I’d recommend OpenDNS (if really needed).