DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro • Hacker News Board

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#21

Post by 4ndrewl » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:28 PM UTC

Elbrus wrote: post #17

webstrand wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most likely SOCKS5? At least in Firefox there's builtin UI for configuring it separately from OS. Chromium is more annoying and needs command line flags. They claim to use wireguard, which might be something a browser extension can start on-demand?

> Most likely SOCKS5? AFAIK, there's still no proper SOCKS user authorization. So if I do something like that on my own VPS, I'll quickly have like 10 000 open connections from Pakistan there. > At least in Firefox there's builtin UI for configuring it separately from OS Yes, also extensions like FoxyProxy. SOCKS4/5 configuration in Firefox is a pure joy. Adding a Putty tunnel there is probably the only simple way to…

tunnel it over ssh?

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#22

Post by csande17 » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:28 PM UTC

Elbrus wrote: post #10

> No need to install a separate VPN app. Once you sign up for Privacy Pro, you can install our VPN right in your DuckDuckGo browser > we use the open-source WireGuard protocol Any info on how that is implemented? Did they build some plug-in, where a user can enter VPN details/credentials? Asking since I'd love to have something, where I can add my own self-hosted VPN details to have browser only (not the whole machin…

The article links to some help pages which clarify that, although you need the browser to connect to the VPN, once connected it applies globally to the whole machine (https://duckduckgo.com/duckduckgo-help-pages/privacy-pro/vpn...).

So if you'll pardon my pun, I think they've probably just duck-taped a standard VPN client app into their browser app.

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#23

Post by politelemon » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:35 PM UTC

Their browser is not available for Linux. I strongly contend that a company that has privacy products, but shows no awareness of Linux, is not one that takes privacy seriously.

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#24

Post by yjftsjthsd-h » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:36 PM UTC

TekMol wrote: post #7

What is the use case of a VPN? To hide the IPs of the servers you are visiting from your internet provider? With a VPN, the VPN provider sees those IPs. How is that better? And why would I care that my internet provider sees those IPs in the first place?

I've had an ISP literally send me a piece of mail telling me they were going to monetize my browsing data. The VPN at least claims it's trying to protect my privacy.

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#25

Post by kube-system » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:39 PM UTC

TekMol wrote: post #7

What is the use case of a VPN? To hide the IPs of the servers you are visiting from your internet provider? With a VPN, the VPN provider sees those IPs. How is that better? And why would I care that my internet provider sees those IPs in the first place?

The most common use case is when you don't trust your local network connection. In some places, ISPs collect and sell browsing data. In many places, public wifi hotspots do too. Whether or not one or the other is more trustworthy is a personal judgement call.

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#26

Post by tober18 » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:41 PM UTC

czbond wrote: post #13

I wonder if they are white labeling something like F-Secure for the VPN

From the blog, the VPN is "built and operated by DuckDuckGo, not an outside provider."

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#27

Post by robertn702 » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:43 PM UTC

I didn't even realize DDG had a browser. I've been using Brave for a few years now which has also offered a built-in VPN (which I don't use). If anyone has chose DDG over Brave, what were the deciding factors?

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#28

Post by echelon_musk » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:44 PM UTC

Whatever this product is I feel the name is already a hindrance. Normal products don't have privacy in the name. Rightly or wrongly you will be judged when you say 'btw I use ... Privacy...'.

The product should have strong privacy built into it and a commitment from the owners to keep it this way. Calling it something mundane and then competing on the merits of the product will favor mass adoption.

How many users of WhatsApp really understand the implications of E2E? Would they have installed it if it was call 'Chat App Privacy Pro'?

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#29

Post by nickburns » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:46 PM UTC

robertn702 wrote: post #27

I didn't even realize DDG had a browser. I've been using Brave for a few years now which has also offered a built-in VPN (which I don't use). If anyone has chose DDG over Brave, what were the deciding factors?

https://librewolf.net/

Re: DuckDuckGo Privacy Pro

#30

Post by Elbrus » Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 5:51 PM UTC

4ndrewl wrote: post #21

Elbrus wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most likely SOCKS5? AFAIK, there's still no proper SOCKS user authorization. So if I do something like that on my own VPS, I'll quickly have like 10 000 open connections from Pakistan there. > At least in Firefox there's builtin UI for configuring it separately from OS Yes, also extensions like FoxyProxy. SOCKS4/5 configuration in Firefox is a pure joy. Adding a Putty tunnel there is probably the only simple way to…

tunnel it over ssh?

Yes, Connection -> SSH -> Tunnels in Putty connection options.

Add a dynamic tunnel there.

Start the session.

Then enter 127.0.0.1 and the port you've chosen as a SOCKS v5 proxy in Firefox options.

Congratulations! Your poor man's VPN is ready :)