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

Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 419 posts

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#141

Post by chrismorgan »

charcircuit wrote: post #111
kbrkbr wrote: post #95

After Wisconsin finds out how to reliably filter vpn, they can then teach Netflix and Akamai how to do it. Last time I checked modestly reliable geoblocking existed, and completely unreliable vpn blocking. A friend told me that when he comes across a site for which Nordvpn is blocked, he just changes IP. Latest the third one always works, even on YouTube (he is all about privacy).

You don't have to reliably block something to make a law against it. Murder is illegal despite the government not figuring out how to reliably stop people from murdering each other.

So many people miss this in such discussions. Like that Australian politician’s “the laws of physics are all very well, but the laws of Australia are the only ones we care about” which was widely ridiculed in technical circles that did not grasp its truth: that law is all about declaring physically-possible actions illicit.

However, to address your specific chosen example, one could argue a difference from murder, if they say “your site must block these traffic sources or you’re in trouble”: one could argue (it’s not at all cut and dried) that it’s like saying that venues are liable for the murders committed at them, rather than the murderer.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#142

Post by [deleted] »

charcircuit wrote: post #111
kbrkbr wrote: post #95

After Wisconsin finds out how to reliably filter vpn, they can then teach Netflix and Akamai how to do it. Last time I checked modestly reliable geoblocking existed, and completely unreliable vpn blocking. A friend told me that when he comes across a site for which Nordvpn is blocked, he just changes IP. Latest the third one always works, even on YouTube (he is all about privacy).

You don't have to reliably block something to make a law against it. Murder is illegal despite the government not figuring out how to reliably stop people from murdering each other.

[deleted]

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#143

Post by rgblambda »

hellotheretoday wrote: post #127
duxup wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think putting parents in control is the right path, but will reveal a sad fact. Many parents aren't taking time to be in control, and no amount of legislation will fix that.

This is 100% the response. I work with kids in mental health and the “kick the can to the parents” response is so shortsighted Apple and android controls aren’t that difficult to understand. Roblox parental controls aren’t that difficult to understand. Could it be simpler by unifying these things under one framework? Sure - I’ve worked with tons of parents who fall under the trap that Roblox is safe because they set…

It'll take legal responsibility being placed on the parent, and one parent being prosecuted and convicted for child neglect, in order for that attitude to change.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#144

Post by LadyCailin »

defanor wrote: post #140

> It Won’t Even Work I heard similar sentiments about censorship efforts in Russia, but it does seem to work, unfortunately. So far they have outlawed and blocked major VPN providers (and keep blocking more, including non-commercial ones, like Tor bridges, and foreign hosting companies' websites), blocked major detectable protocols used for those (IPsec, WireGuard), made usage of proxying ("VPN") an aggravating circu…

It won’t even work*

*without resorting to complete Russian style government control

The US is not (yet) Russia. The rule of law is definitely being destroyed as we speak, so who knows 5, 10 years down the road, but there are still several prerequisite institutions that need to be destroyed before the US could reliably enforce a VPN ban.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#145

Post by rgblambda »

James_K wrote: post #125
duxup wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think putting parents in control is the right path, but will reveal a sad fact. Many parents aren't taking time to be in control, and no amount of legislation will fix that.

A trivial amount of legislation can fix that. Law reads: ISPs must implement implement parental blocks by default, exceptions may only be made on a per-device basis. Parental controls must also be enabled on public wifi. Easy as that. It doesn't matter how lazy you are, actively going and turning something off is more effort than not.

>ISPs must implement implement parental blocks by default

This is already the case in the UK. We discovered another sad fact. Parents will suddenly develop the technical literacy to turn parental controls off because it's inconveniencing them, but won't bother to fine grain the control to make it safe for their children.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#146

Post by merizian »

duxup wrote: post #50
txrx0000 wrote: post #32

A device-side IP filter locked behind a password that parents can configure in the device's settings would be much more effective and easier to implement than censoring the Internet. This should be the default solution, yet it's never brought up for whatever reason. Not to mention these online content censorship laws for kids are wrong in principle because parents are supposed to be in control of how they raise each…

I think putting parents in control is the right path, but will reveal a sad fact. Many parents aren't taking time to be in control, and no amount of legislation will fix that.

I disagree that legislation can't help. Fundamentally there's an education disconnect and unnecessary friction in setting up parental controls. Governments can better educate parents about the risks, and give them better tools to filter/monitor content their children watch (eg at the device level). Being a parent is hard and it's possible to make this part easier imo.

eg consider child-proof packaging and labeling laws for medication, which dramatically reduced child mortality due to accidental drug misuse.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#147

Post by LadyCailin »

txrx0000 wrote: post #34
skeledrew wrote: post #31

And cue the rise of self-hosted VPNs. 1 click to get a VPS instance, install VPN software, and make a connection. Automatically destroy the instance with another click or after a certain amount of time.

If this keeps going, they will ban self-hosting next: only government-approved hosts allowed. We can't just rely on technological solutions because you can't out-tech the law at scale. People need to actually understand that the government is very close to having the tools needed for a stable technocratic authoritarian regime here in the US and all around the world. It might not happen immediately even if they have t…

If it went this far, the US would no longer be recognizable. Not to say it can’t happen, and the US is fast marching in that direction, but this would be a dramatic shift in the entire underlying fabric of the country.

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#148

Post by monooso »

James_K wrote: post #130
InMice wrote: post #98

Of course, what if I use an SSH tunnel instead as that normally suffices a lot easier for me. It's basically the same underlying libraries? They would have to regulate the use of libssl, libcrypto, etc. This makes no sense lol. Am I going to find myself in jail one day for "Unregulated use of a private/public key pair?"

>Of course, what if I use an SSH tunnel instead Are you a child? Probably not, so you are just accessing legally available content by alternate means. It's strange how many people think they are out-smarting a system when said system is explicitly designed to allow them access. These laws are primarily intended to stop children browsing the internet from being exposed to porn and gore when they're simply browsing the…

Did you read the article?

Firstly, the article makes it clear that the definition of "harmful to children" is being systematically expanded to mean "makes conservatives a bit uncomfortable."

And secondly:

> It's strange how many people think they are out-smarting a system when said system is explicitly designed to allow them access.

The whole point of the article is to draw attention to the fact that certain regions are trying to make the use of a VPN illegal. If that were to happen, using an SSH tunnel would indeed be "outsmarting the system."

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#149

Post by rgblambda »

rjh29 wrote: post #122
Dave9k wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK ISPs block around 1500+ domains through High Court orders and police make 12k+ arrests a year for online speech. You don’t need a formal firewall when the effect is the same in practice.

I would like a citation for 12k arrests a year as that seems insane to me.

https://www.thetimes.com/uk/crime/article/police-make-30-arr...

The findings in the Times article were subsequently debated in the House of Lords. The figures weren't disputed: https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/select-communications-off...

Re: Lawmakers want to ban VPNs

#150

Post by monooso »

rjh29 wrote: post #122
Dave9k wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK ISPs block around 1500+ domains through High Court orders and police make 12k+ arrests a year for online speech. You don’t need a formal firewall when the effect is the same in practice.

I would like a citation for 12k arrests a year as that seems insane to me.

Not GP, but this may be of interest: https://allsides.com/
Post reply on HN