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

Mozilla VPN

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 531 posts

Re: Mozilla VPN

#291

Post by ObsoleteNerd »

PhilippGille wrote: post #273
lilyball wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about FastMail? They have a stellar email service. They also offer contacts and calendars, though I don't personally use those (I use iCloud for that).

Wasn't there a privacy problem because of the Australian encryption law [1] and the company being based in Australia? [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18636076

It’s just as private as Gmail, which is the comparison in question.

If you want secure, you wouldn’t be using email in the first place.

Re: Mozilla VPN

#292

Post by abofh »

deepbreath wrote: post #157
closeparen wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A VPN is just a tunnel from one point to another. You'd have to establish why the remote end is more trustworthy than the local end. Being located in a hostile jurisdiction may be somewhat protective, but it would also seem likely that compromising foreign VPN services is within the NSA's wheelhouse.

If nothing else, it significantly reduces the entropy of your IP when websites are fingerprinting you, especially if your ISP assigns you a static IP. Even if you don't have a static IP, I suspect the entropy of your /24 (IPv4) is also a lot smaller when over VPN.

Do you understand the words you're using?

Re: Mozilla VPN

#293

Post by aryonoco »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #257

As a security person, I am somewhat baffled by the popularity of VPNs. I have no idea why anyone would use them for general internet usage, and I suspect the majority of VPN service users are misinformed about what they think they are gaining. Any VPN subscribers want to fill me in? The only thing I can think of is hiding the source of pirated media being shared via bittorrent.

Because my government passed a legislation that forces all ISPs to collect all metadata and to store them and this information is accessible to be searched by multitude of government departments without a warrant.

I am, in principle against this policy. When it was proposed, I tried activism and letter writing and meeting with Senate staffers to try and fight it. I lost, it became law with bipartisan support from both major parties here. So now I use a VPN.

You find my usecase baffling?

Re: Mozilla VPN

#294

Post by maxisme »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #257

As a security person, I am somewhat baffled by the popularity of VPNs. I have no idea why anyone would use them for general internet usage, and I suspect the majority of VPN service users are misinformed about what they think they are gaining. Any VPN subscribers want to fill me in? The only thing I can think of is hiding the source of pirated media being shared via bittorrent.

Sharing an IP address with a load of other people makes one more anonymous. I know there are lots of different ways of identifying someone online but it is a start. My ISP is also behind a CGNAT so I am also sharing that IP with loads of other people and also most ISPs don’t provide static IP addresses so you can’t rely on an that either but I guess I also trust my VPN provider to handle identifying data more than my ISP as I haven’t even given them my name (Mullvad)

Re: Mozilla VPN

#295

Post by aryonoco »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #278
pomokhtari wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of countries block access to websites. US and EU are not the whole world! VPN helps people to circumvent censorship. I use a VPN daily because without it, there is no Twitter/HackerNews/Reddit/Youtube/... .

Totally understood for those countries, but it’s still hugely popular in the US. That’s what I’m wondering about.

Many ISPs in the US perform DPI, sell anonymized data to marketing companies, slowdown YouTube/Netflix when the backend pipes are congested, etc. If you want your ISP to provide you with a dumb pipe and not interfere with your traffic, a VPN is an easy solution.

Re: Mozilla VPN

#296

Post by Dylan16807 »

dingaling wrote: post #203
ryantgtg wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't wait for the "you don't need a VPN" folks to acknowledge that they don't understand why lots of people actually use VPNs. It's DMCA, man. DMCA.

Rather ironic that people pay for VPN services to access content that they won't pay for. Just don't bother with Big Media content and they won't need a VPN... There's plenty to do in life other than torrenting the latest HBO series.

They'll go after you for downloading something you already paid for, or was free to begin with.

Re: Mozilla VPN

#297

Post by maxisme »

vpnwire wrote: post #187
RandomBacon wrote: post #2

It uses Mullvad, and is the same price as Mullvad. I am assuming Mozilla gets a cut. When my current Mullvad subscription expires, I will switch over.

I’ve been speedtesting a few VPN networks, and the biggest surprise has been how fast Mullvad + Wireguard are. I need to try NordLynx (NordVPN’s flavor of Wireguard) for more of an apples-to-apples comparison, but at least on the speed metric, it looks like Mozilla chose a good partner. Making deeper data exploration possible is a work in progress, but you can see what I have so far here: https://vpnwire.co

Is Mullvad the only provider you are using with WireGuard?

Re: Mozilla VPN

#298

Post by sigmonsays »

archenary wrote: post #286
lilyball wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about FastMail? They have a stellar email service. They also offer contacts and calendars, though I don't personally use those (I use iCloud for that).

Happy Fastmail user here. I love it for the snappy web client. It's only after I switched that I realized how slow Gmail felt.

I'd like to echo similar feedback. After I dropped gmail and went to fastmail i noticed it to be MUCH faster. gmail is my primary personal account. I really appreciated taking control of e-mail again.

i'm happily paying for e-mail and tend to think putting money down ensures I keep myself honest and maintain a workflow. Now I only save e-mails that are important to me, instead of archiving everything.

Re: Mozilla VPN

#299

Post by afiori »

stilisstuk wrote: post #254
godzillabrennus wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve used Fastmail for years now on a work account. It’s best feature is that it’s not Google. First, no phone support. Hardly acceptable when even Google has this. Second, no collaboration suite like Drive/Docs. Third, no addons I’m accustomed to having in my daily driver email suite. Things I miss include schedule to send later, default reply all, and no priority inbox. Im stuck using Google for email and maps. I h…

I feel a bit different: Email is a standard. You are talking about an app. Send later is the job of the application,not the standard. Same with reply all. Intelligent priority inbox is _hard_ but i. Principle the same. When you use gmail you conflate the standard with the app.

The point of these discussions is that the standard (IMAP specifically) is inadequate to a lot of modern use.

One good thing that Fastmail is doing is promoting a REST-like IMAP alternative ( https://jmap.io/ ) that makes it easier[1] to go back to the distinction application/protocol.

[1] by this I mean that implementing an app like gmail over IMAP would be a terrible idea, while JMAP would be at least a bit better (it also adds browser support as it allows HTTP as transport layer)

Re: Mozilla VPN

#300

Post by Quekid5 »

abofh wrote: post #290
Arnavion wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Customer support via phone call.

How often are you calling support? The only time I've needed them was when I was locked out of the admin account, and there was no way to reach a human.

Indeed. I've been using FastMail for email (only) for a couple of years at this point, and I've literally never had to contact their support.

It just works.

(I'd actually be more worried about the AU legislation about permissible snooping, but... and I can't believe I'm saying this... It works well enough that I don't care. Most providers have learned to not send actual sensitive info by email.)

Post reply on HN