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

Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

metzdowd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 413 posts

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#231

Post by nucleardog »

permo-w wrote: post #163
kerng wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[Clearly not turn itself on.] Funny story, I was shocked and quite annoyed that an iPhone automatically turns on Wifi and stuff every day by itself - even if you turn it off... Still dont know how to actually turn it off

if you disable from quick menu, it turns back on. if you disable from settings, it doesn’t

And when you do so it does flash a message along the lines of “Disconnecting nearby wifi until tomorrow”.

Which makes it pretty clear it’s not a wifi kill switch but just a “my current connection is shit, let me use cellular” button.

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#232

Post by crossroadsguy »

xnx wrote: post #227

This is great. I hope this spurs Google to make their VPN ( https://one.google.com/about/vpn ) more widely available. A few audiences they could expand it to: any ChromeOS device, any Pixel phone, any Android phone, any mobile Chrome user, any Chrome user.

They’ll release that as a Chrome app.

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#233

Post by ec109685 »

xiphias2 wrote: post #155
pilif wrote: post #3

My experience with this so far was... mixed. - This breaks DNS resolution for company-internal domains. - This routes all my traffic through CloudFlare or another CDN I might or might not trust (yes, the IP is hidden, but not the data) - it significantly slows down my internet access on my location. - it tends to turn itself on again without my intervention especially the last point is very problematic for me

> This breaks DNS resolution for company-internal domains. Why would it? The WWDC developer video clearly states that it’s only for public domains.

I believe the DNS requests are routed through their ingress proxy, so there's no chance to hit an internal split horizon DNS server.

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#234

Post by dehrmann »

olivierestsage wrote: post #54
Spooky23 wrote: post #7

I think this is great, if only as a way to kill the bullshit consumer VPN business, which sells snake oil.

I think that's painting with a pretty broad brush. What's wrong with Mullvad, for example?

VPNs mostly do what they claim, but they may or may not be government or marketing honeypots, and a lot of the sales pitches around hackers and privacy aren't as interesting in the days of HTTPS. Aside from piracy and bypassing region restrictions, you're just hiding your IP address, but those change often enough already.

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#235

Post by Mindwipe »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #181
Mindwipe wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HBO is blocking Private Relay regardless.

Only for now. When it rolls out widely, Apple's sheer scale will most likely force the issue.

I doubt it, unless HBO and Apple are able to come to some assurance on it.

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#237

Post by unknown_error »

willis936 wrote: post #183
kergonath wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Otherwise how come that would even be legal to run? Why wouldn’t it be? I was under the impression that what isn’t forbidden by law was legal by default. AFAIK, running a VPN platform isn’t illegal. > If someone commits a crime and government cannot find evidence, because Apple gives shielding, then isn't that making them hypothetically an accomplice? I hate this argument. It’s lazy and can be used to accuse anybod…

>I was under the impression that what isn’t forbidden by law was legal by default. Even beyond that, personal privacy from the government is enshrined in the 4th amendment. Just because there was some executive actions and illegal laws made does not mean the 4th amendment suddenly disappears. No person or entity has the right to dragnet all communications.

> personal privacy from the government is enshrined in the 4th amendment

Yeaaaaah, let's just pretend Snowden and Manning never happened.

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#238

Post by irae »

xnx wrote: post #227

This is great. I hope this spurs Google to make their VPN ( https://one.google.com/about/vpn ) more widely available. A few audiences they could expand it to: any ChromeOS device, any Pixel phone, any Android phone, any mobile Chrome user, any Chrome user.

A lot of people think of VPN as escaping Google mega-giga-tracking schemes. So growing their own would be doomed to fail.

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#239

Post by dehrmann »

wintermutestwin wrote: post #121
Spooky23 wrote: post #7

I think this is great, if only as a way to kill the bullshit consumer VPN business, which sells snake oil.

Doesn't a consumer VPN keep my ISP from building a data profile on me? Yes, I get that now my VPN provider can build that data profile, but I am certain that my ISP is a vile monopoly that has corrupted the regulators that are supposed to represent me.

I have Sonic, so I trust my ISP more than a random VPN provider. Even if you have AT&T, they have a legal team that makes they provide a lot of opt-outs. I don't trust that they work, but there are a lot more eyes on them than a VPN provider.

Re: Apple's iCloud+ “VPN”

#240

Post by smoldesu »

headmelted wrote: post #45

I've been trying to point this out to people but YouTube personalities have a louder voice than anyone else so you end up with bad information. Props to Apple for offering an (albeit low entropy) onion router on their own infrastructure. I can't imagine this is going to win them any friends in government circles but it's definitely a step in the right direction. I'd also really like to see Apple come clean about the…

> I can't imagine this is going to win them any friends in government circles but it's definitely a step in the right direction.

Apple already has all the friends they need in the "government circles". They're fully enrolled in PRISM and are well-known to kowtow to the demands of corrupt leadership (see: Russian iPhones, Chinese iCloud hosting)

Post reply on HN