Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

mullvad.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 195 posts

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#11

Post by dangus »

Daviey wrote: post #6
dangus wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no disk in the servers, so there is no chance for user information to persist anywhere. I also wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a performance benefit, since RAM is far faster than any permanent storage. The cons are probably just that this is a pretty unusual architecture that they probably had to put some work into setting up and making it reliable.

It's essentially a PXE-boot diskless environment, what makes you think it is unusual and possibility of being unreliable?

I should say, unsuitable for certain use cases.

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#12

Post by jameskilton »

kwanbix wrote: post #8

One thing that I always wondered from VPNs. Let's say a pedophile uses Mullvad to get forbidden images, isn't the VPN liable? I mean, the law enforcement will see that the IP was from Mullvad's office, so I assume they are the ones doing it? How do they avoid this? It is a real doubt. Maybe stupid, but real.

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that this generally falls under Section 230, as you can make the same argument about Comcast, AT&T, et.al. who lets the bytes go over their infrastructure.

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#13

Post by Brian_K_White »

Daviey wrote: post #6
dangus wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no disk in the servers, so there is no chance for user information to persist anywhere. I also wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a performance benefit, since RAM is far faster than any permanent storage. The cons are probably just that this is a pretty unusual architecture that they probably had to put some work into setting up and making it reliable.

It's essentially a PXE-boot diskless environment, what makes you think it is unusual and possibility of being unreliable?

What important things do you store only in ram? Why not? Isn't it reliable?

I think they just mean ephemeral.

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#14

Post by manishsharan »

kwanbix wrote: post #8

One thing that I always wondered from VPNs. Let's say a pedophile uses Mullvad to get forbidden images, isn't the VPN liable? I mean, the law enforcement will see that the IP was from Mullvad's office, so I assume they are the ones doing it? How do they avoid this? It is a real doubt. Maybe stupid, but real.

and then suppose you login to that VPN and are looking up children's sweaters for your kids and keep the session on .. while law enforcement is looking up the ip address associated with the earlier activity which is now assigned to you . Good luck explaining to the the cops about VPNs and IP addresses.

This is my fear.

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#15

Post by kwanbix »

jameskilton wrote: post #12
kwanbix wrote: post #8

One thing that I always wondered from VPNs. Let's say a pedophile uses Mullvad to get forbidden images, isn't the VPN liable? I mean, the law enforcement will see that the IP was from Mullvad's office, so I assume they are the ones doing it? How do they avoid this? It is a real doubt. Maybe stupid, but real.

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that this generally falls under Section 230, as you can make the same argument about Comcast, AT&T, et.al. who lets the bytes go over their infrastructure.

But the difference is that Comcast, AT&T, et.al can say, jameskilton was using this IP. The VPN is saying, I don't know.

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#16

Post by madspindel »

kwanbix wrote: post #8

One thing that I always wondered from VPNs. Let's say a pedophile uses Mullvad to get forbidden images, isn't the VPN liable? I mean, the law enforcement will see that the IP was from Mullvad's office, so I assume they are the ones doing it? How do they avoid this? It is a real doubt. Maybe stupid, but real.

Mullvad actually got raided by the police in a similar case, described here: https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2023/5/2/update-the-swedish-auth...

> However, had they taken something, it would not have given them access to any customer information.

> These are the national laws that makes it possible to run a privacy-focused VPN service in Sweden:

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#17

Post by flkenosad »

manishsharan wrote: post #14
kwanbix wrote: post #8

One thing that I always wondered from VPNs. Let's say a pedophile uses Mullvad to get forbidden images, isn't the VPN liable? I mean, the law enforcement will see that the IP was from Mullvad's office, so I assume they are the ones doing it? How do they avoid this? It is a real doubt. Maybe stupid, but real.

and then suppose you login to that VPN and are looking up children's sweaters for your kids and keep the session on .. while law enforcement is looking up the ip address associated with the earlier activity which is now assigned to you . Good luck explaining to the the cops about VPNs and IP addresses. This is my fear.

You don't have to explain anything to cops. You explain it to lawyers and judges.

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#18

Post by dylan604 »

kwanbix wrote: post #8

One thing that I always wondered from VPNs. Let's say a pedophile uses Mullvad to get forbidden images, isn't the VPN liable? I mean, the law enforcement will see that the IP was from Mullvad's office, so I assume they are the ones doing it? How do they avoid this? It is a real doubt. Maybe stupid, but real.

All this would do would be to lead the investigation to get a warrant/subpoena to have the VPN service provide user details about the account and anything else relevant like logs. This is where the "we don't log shit" bullet points comes into play as well as running only from RAM. If the warrant allows for removal of hardware, all data is lost once power is removed. LEOs would have to bring lots of batteries.

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#19

Post by [deleted] »

Daviey wrote: post #6
dangus wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no disk in the servers, so there is no chance for user information to persist anywhere. I also wouldn’t be surprised if it’s a performance benefit, since RAM is far faster than any permanent storage. The cons are probably just that this is a pretty unusual architecture that they probably had to put some work into setting up and making it reliable.

It's essentially a PXE-boot diskless environment, what makes you think it is unusual and possibility of being unreliable?

[deleted]

Re: We have successfully completed our migration to RAM-only VPN infrastructure

#20

Post by x86x87 »

manishsharan wrote: post #14
kwanbix wrote: post #8

One thing that I always wondered from VPNs. Let's say a pedophile uses Mullvad to get forbidden images, isn't the VPN liable? I mean, the law enforcement will see that the IP was from Mullvad's office, so I assume they are the ones doing it? How do they avoid this? It is a real doubt. Maybe stupid, but real.

and then suppose you login to that VPN and are looking up children's sweaters for your kids and keep the session on .. while law enforcement is looking up the ip address associated with the earlier activity which is now assigned to you . Good luck explaining to the the cops about VPNs and IP addresses. This is my fear.

Who enjoys privacy when we can all live in fear?

You need a VPN that actually cares about your privacy and goea the extra mile to ensure it. On top of that if the VPN service does not know who you are how can they actually tell the cops. On top of that you don't need to explain it to the cops - if you are ever accused this should be done in a court of law where we understand what ips are (heck, even some cops understand it - it's not exactly rocket science nowadays)

Post reply on HN