91–100 of 344 posts
Mullvad, because it has a good interface for port forwarding, and I kinda like the fact that it supports wireguard. It's also fast and reliable (but so are many of the others), and apparently has good privacy. I've previously used AirVPN, which was great except for not having any servers near me, and ExpressVPN, which was great except for not having such a good interface for port forwarding (and also it's the most ex…
Mullvad, because it has a good interface for port forwarding, and I kinda like the fact that it supports wireguard. It's also fast and reliable (but so are many of the others), and apparently has good privacy. I've previously used AirVPN, which was great except for not having any servers near me, and ExpressVPN, which was great except for not having such a good interface for port forwarding (and also it's the most ex…
One day I woke up and realised I do not know who runs those companies. For example, Nord is registered in Panama, a country where declaring company ownership is not mandatory. Why should I trust them with my data?
After a little digging I found that Proton is the only VPN provider whose owners have put their names and reputations on the the line. The only one.
It doesn't mean I trust them 100%. But if someone is willing to put their face on their website, I'd say it gives them an extra incentive to do their job right.
the only thing I like is how they aren't actually associated with Tor in any way... lol...
Currently manually pay for an EC2 instance and install wireguard on it (I have my playbook to automate the processes).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So to me this filters down to: You care about your privacy and not have your (meta) data gathered up, but you don't care enough about it ensure that you're really protected, you just hope you are by piping your data off somewhere else, even though the place you're piping it to might also be doing the dirty you. I do understand your point, which is (correct me if i'm wrong) that you trust FSecure/Freedome to be taking…
I'd say you are grumpy ;) There is no comparison for ISP with TOS saying they can and will sell your data and VPN company which explicitly advertises privacy. First it is false advertising and second with GDPR such company would be wiped out after somebody figures it out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So to me this filters down to: You care about your privacy and not have your (meta) data gathered up, but you don't care enough about it ensure that you're really protected, you just hope you are by piping your data off somewhere else, even though the place you're piping it to might also be doing the dirty you. I do understand your point, which is (correct me if i'm wrong) that you trust FSecure/Freedome to be taking…
I'd say you are grumpy ;) There is no comparison for ISP with TOS saying they can and will sell your data and VPN company which explicitly advertises privacy. First it is false advertising and second with GDPR such company would be wiped out after somebody figures it out.
I used a few over the years. Boleh, Nord, PIA, etc. One day I woke up and realised I do not know who runs those companies. For example, Nord is registered in Panama, a country where declaring company ownership is not mandatory. Why should I trust them with my data? After a little digging I found that Proton is the only VPN provider whose owners have put their names and reputations on the the line. The only one. It do…
---
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For some of us, we live in jurisdictions where all ISPs are legally required to keep all metadata for all connections. (In tinpot pseudo democracies with governments who fail to understand technology but pass intrusive laws governing it anyway, then declare "The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia.") In that case, a few bucks per month is a pret…
So to me this filters down to: You care about your privacy and not have your (meta) data gathered up, but you don't care enough about it ensure that you're really protected, you just hope you are by piping your data off somewhere else, even though the place you're piping it to might also be doing the dirty you. I do understand your point, which is (correct me if i'm wrong) that you trust FSecure/Freedome to be taking…
From my perspective, my ISP is untrustworthy because it's legally required to be where I live. At least FSecure are not subject to that law, and are business-wise and give me a choice of endpoints that are outside of the jurisdiction of that law. They _might_ be collecting and on-selling that metadata, but I believe they are not. I 100% _know_ my ISP (and all my alternative choices for an ISP) are. So using them is a win.
Even if FSecure turn out to be evil - they'll be doing it for different reasons to my ISP (profit motive vs being compelled by local Australian laws), so the nature of my exposure there is different - and so far as I can see, smaller.
I strongly suspect the NSA _are_ tapping the egress of every commercial VPN provider and every commercial VPS provider. But if my adversary ever becomes the NSA I'm fucked, and I accept that.
If the local taxi commission or dog catcher go asking my ISP for my metadata records - even though I don't own a dog or a taxi license, I feel happier knowing my ISP can only tell them "Don't know, sorry. Here's a bunch of encrypted connections to various VPN endpoints around the globe."