How well might connectivity limitation work? It took China immense centralization and a lot of technical effort to build the great firewall, which is not exactly impenetrable, though.
VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
31–40 of 228 posts
Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#32A heads up: theres a really nice project called Streisand[1] which provides a multi-protocol VPN with very little effort. You can launch one on a cheap cloud provider (like DO, if their policy allows). [1] https://github.com/jlund/streisand
Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#33A heads up: theres a really nice project called Streisand[1] which provides a multi-protocol VPN with very little effort. You can launch one on a cheap cloud provider (like DO, if their policy allows). [1] https://github.com/jlund/streisand
Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#34I think the bigger hole is DNS. Full-tunnel VPNs to primarily TLS-encrypted sites seems like overkill. Encrypted DNS plus an "HTTPS Everywhere" plugin should obfuscate enough info for most people without significantly affecting latency.
You still need the technical know-how to set up a DNSCrypt recursive resolver. The resolver then talks to the respective recursive chain in plain text as DNSCrypt is not something that is widely adopted.
Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#35I think the bigger hole is DNS. Full-tunnel VPNs to primarily TLS-encrypted sites seems like overkill. Encrypted DNS plus an "HTTPS Everywhere" plugin should obfuscate enough info for most people without significantly affecting latency.
Wouldn't it be fairly trivial to guess most of the domains you're visiting by looking at what IP addresses you connect to?
I think that the SNI note below is probably the bigger hole.
Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#36And obviously, you gain a good deal of latency, especially if you use an overseas exit point.
And now we get to deal with shitty services like Netflix punishing privacy-conscious users and blocking access to paid accounts while your VPN is up.
Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#37A heads up: theres a really nice project called Streisand[1] which provides a multi-protocol VPN with very little effort. You can launch one on a cheap cloud provider (like DO, if their policy allows). [1] https://github.com/jlund/streisand
I've used streisand on DO (while traveling in China) and it worked well. There's also a similar project called algo[1] which provides a single protocol with maximum security, in contrast to streisand's multi-protocol flexibility (and increased surface area). https://github.com/trailofbits/algo
Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#38Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#39Until a better solution is found, I think the way the recent IOT botnet stuff + this ISP privacy deregulation is portrayed in the media opens the opportunity for a startup that sells a secure, smart home router + VPN subscription plan.
And you would trust the startup with your traffic because...?
Re: VPNs are not the solution to a policy problem
#40I think the bigger hole is DNS. Full-tunnel VPNs to primarily TLS-encrypted sites seems like overkill. Encrypted DNS plus an "HTTPS Everywhere" plugin should obfuscate enough info for most people without significantly affecting latency.
DNSCrypt + HTTPS everywhere solves the latency issue but it doesn't solve some of the other issues. You still need the technical know-how to set up a DNSCrypt recursive resolver. The resolver then talks to the respective recursive chain in plain text as DNSCrypt is not something that is widely adopted.