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

Post by WendyTheWillow » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 5:00 AM UTC

dspillett wrote: post #169

WendyTheWillow wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, even if it happened to me it would not be relevant for the vast majority.

The point is that it could happen to anyone, if their choice of connectivity arrangements make it possible, so it is a relevant concern for everyone when planning such connectivity arrangements (whether or not they care about the implications of it potentially happening to you, me, or anyone else).

Post by dspillett » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 9:53 AM UTC

WendyTheWillow wrote: post #181

dspillett wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is that it could happen to anyone, if their choice of connectivity arrangements make it possible, so it is a relevant concern for everyone when planning such connectivity arrangements (whether or not they care about the implications of it potentially happening to you, me, or anyone else).

No, it could not happen to anyone, for a whole host of reasons… A number that rounds to zero in the 21st century is the number of people who have been randomly cancelled. You can disagree that it is proportionate to their offense, but z e r o people were just sitting around and woke up a) in the public eye and b) were completely and entirely good people who were maligned needlessly in a permanent way. It is in no way…

Post by aaomidi » Fri, Sep 22, 2023, 4:30 PM UTC

verandaguy wrote: post #110

aaomidi wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.assured.se/publications/Assured_Mullvad_relay_se... Honestly I don’t think audits are worth anything. But it’d be a huge conspiracy to mess with so many parties.

Audits are IMO worthwhile, but end users should be aware of the scope of an audit. In the context of commercial VPN providers, it's usually just a code security audit -- are there any memory leaks? Is sensitive data being passed around a little bit too loosely? Is there some way for unprivileged users to gain privilege escalation by crafting a malicious request against one of your services? In this sense, they're val…

Post by WendyTheWillow » Sat, Sep 23, 2023, 12:19 AM UTC

dspillett wrote: post #186

WendyTheWillow wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the fact that you can’t realize your example still rounds to zero is kind of sad, honestly. Nobody has been cancelled randomly, and I genuinely pity people who go through life fearful such a thing could happen to them.

Having had something similar (though not as serious) happen to someone I know, I very much envy your bliss.

Post by TheRealPomax » Sat, Sep 23, 2023, 5:39 PM UTC

Dylan16807 wrote: post #179

TheRealPomax wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn't. It's pretending that "no comment" means something it doesn't. Just because you want it to mean "yes" doesn't mean it means that . It means "we are not going to comment on this, because we have a sane legal department and we're not going to give you any information one way or another". If you think "no comment" means either yes or no, you're pretending to know something you don't, and you should absolute…

Huh? You're the one that said no comment was suspicious! I said something weaker than that, that it's not very suspicious. I'm not the one that said a canary failing is a yes. I said it was significantly more suspicious than a no comment.