Mullvad: Diskless infrastructure using stboot in beta • Hacker News Board

Re: Mullvad: Diskless infrastructure using stboot in beta

#131

Post by stjohnswarts » Thu, Jan 13, 2022, 12:31 AM UTC

Isn't this the same as just running a boot cd or PXE server and running all the data out of RAM drives? I mean we've been doing this for years on linux as hobbyists haven't we? Or does this bring somethign new to the table?

Re: Mullvad: Diskless infrastructure using stboot in beta

#132

Post by stjohnswarts » Thu, Jan 13, 2022, 12:31 AM UTC

codethief wrote: post #45

I've been following Mullvad for a long time and my impression (from countless reviews and comments here on HN) has been quite positive. But here's what I don't understand: Why are the servers located in Sweden, a country that's known for online surveillance[0] like no other country in the EU? From the Wikipedia article[1]: > The law permits the signals intelligence agency, National Defense Radio Establishment, to mon…

You don't have to use the servers in Sweden if you don't want to.

Re: Mullvad: Diskless infrastructure using stboot in beta

#133

Post by sydthrowaway » Thu, Jan 13, 2022, 2:56 AM UTC

rekoil wrote: post #98

sydthrowaway wrote: post #24

The next step: dedicated VPN over FPGAs

*drools*

Wait, Cisco already do this

Re: Mullvad: Diskless infrastructure using stboot in beta

#134

Post by rekoil » Thu, Jan 13, 2022, 5:20 PM UTC

sydthrowaway wrote: post #133

rekoil wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*drools*

Wait, Cisco already do this

They do? Do you have any product names you can share?

Re: Mullvad: Diskless infrastructure using stboot in beta

#135

Post by nopcode » Fri, Jan 14, 2022, 9:36 AM UTC

gravypod wrote: post #127

kfreds wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

System Transparency reduces your trust assumptions on us. As a VPN provider we are in an immense position of power over you. We aim to reduce your trust assumptions on us to a few things that we would need to explicitly lie about in order to betray you. As an example, let's say that we offered any of our users to at any time during the year show up at our office and inspect our VPN hardware, without warning us before…

> In that situation, if we wanted to betray your trust and privacy, we would need to put in a lot more effort than if we said "We have secure servers. Trust us on that. No you can't see them.". Does that make sense? Have you ever thought about doing something like that with some big youtube personalities? Maybe have them hire some pen testers, randomly show up to one of your datacenters, and post recordings of what i…

> big youtube personalities

You mean the same people that are being "sponsored" by VPN providers for years? Why would we want to trust youtubers of all people?