31–40 of 205 posts
I would be interested in hearing what the security pros think about this..tptacek, grugq, dguido, idlewords. At this point, these are the guys I trust with security advice. Worth mentioning their VPN recommendations: algo by trailofbits and freedome. There is another paid service they recommend but I can't recall the name.
How does this compare to TunnelBear [1]? - TunnelBear is a bit more expensive (4.99$/mo, paid annually vs 4$/mo). - TunnelBear supports up to 5 connections per account vs 2. I use TunnelBear regularly for my browser and phone. Both works great. My subscription is going to expire soon and I'll be open to try other VPN providers, not that there is anything wrong with TunnelBear. Any recommendations? This site [2] has f…
HN gets regular "what VPN should I use?" questions and my answer is always the same: Algo [1]. It is designed to be simple to set up, simple to tear down, and usable with numerous cloud providers or your own Linux server. [1] https://github.com/trailofbits/algo
How does this compare to TunnelBear [1]? - TunnelBear is a bit more expensive (4.99$/mo, paid annually vs 4$/mo). - TunnelBear supports up to 5 connections per account vs 2. I use TunnelBear regularly for my browser and phone. Both works great. My subscription is going to expire soon and I'll be open to try other VPN providers, not that there is anything wrong with TunnelBear. Any recommendations? This site [2] has f…
HN gets regular "what VPN should I use?" questions and my answer is always the same: Algo [1]. It is designed to be simple to set up, simple to tear down, and usable with numerous cloud providers or your own Linux server. [1] https://github.com/trailofbits/algo
Earlier quoted context omitted.
private internet access appears to be good, but I do not think they are very transparent about their operation.
I found malware in the PIA installer. Not sure if it was planted by PIA themselves or I was subjected to a MITM attack, and so I would never use any bespoke VPN software again. Best just downloading the OpenVPN config files and plug them into something like Viscosity[0] (which I trust over the more bespoke VPN clients made by the VPN providers themselves). [0]: https://www.sparklabs.com/viscosity/
You're still better using independent VPN clients, but I would not trust them at all if the installer actually has malware.
I would be interested in hearing what the security pros think about this..tptacek, grugq, dguido, idlewords. At this point, these are the guys I trust with security advice. Worth mentioning their VPN recommendations: algo by trailofbits and freedome. There is another paid service they recommend but I can't recall the name.
First of all, there does not appear to be a whitepaper available that describes the security architecture in any detail. This is an immediate red flag.
Second, they do have a "Security Features" page which is rather light on the details; it mentions that ProtonVPN uses AES-256 (encryption), RSA 2048 (key exchange) and HMAC-SHA256 (auth).
I'll start with RSA: the fact that they use RSA at all for a new cryptosystem in 2017 is a red flag for me. I also can't see any details of how they use RSA, so I don't know if they have implemented padding. If they haven't implemented padding (and done so correctly!), the VPN is insecure and we can stop right here. Honestly, they should be using ECC. I'm assuming they're not using something like ECDSA because RSA is faster (but not so much so to justify the potential security tradeoff, even in a VPN client).
On to AES: they commit the common marketing-mandated-security-page sin of focusing on the key size instead of the block cipher mode. They don't explain which block cipher mode they're using for AES at all - another red flag. For all I know they're using ECB (in which case, the VPN is insecure and we can stop right here). This is putting aside the question of whether or not they correctly implemented AES in whatever mode they're using.
With regards to HMAC-SHA256: in theory this is fine, but again we have no details. I'm going to go ahead and dock another point here because they're choosing to use separate primitives for encryption and authentication, when the best practice would be to use authenticated encryption like AES-GCM or AES-CCM. I admit this is bikeshedding a bit: respectable cryptographers (like cperciva) have a preference for separate construction. However, this is a VPN we're talking about, and an authenticated encryption mode would be faster than separate encryption and authentication.
A few caveats to my points: I'm quarterbacking their cryptosystem design based on one paragraph of the security page, because that's all I can find that describes their crypto. It doesn't describe it in detail, so it might still be secure. I have no knowledge of their implementation, so I can't critique that. That said, if I had to weigh the red flags I've observed here against their "developed by scientists from MIT and CERN" marketing and nothing else, the red flags win out.
How does this compare to TunnelBear [1]? - TunnelBear is a bit more expensive (4.99$/mo, paid annually vs 4$/mo). - TunnelBear supports up to 5 connections per account vs 2. I use TunnelBear regularly for my browser and phone. Both works great. My subscription is going to expire soon and I'll be open to try other VPN providers, not that there is anything wrong with TunnelBear. Any recommendations? This site [2] has f…
Unless they've changed their policy in the last few months, TunnelBear won't let you use SSH over any port other than 22, so if you need to SSH into a server with a non-standard port you're out of luck.
How does this compare to TunnelBear [1]? - TunnelBear is a bit more expensive (4.99$/mo, paid annually vs 4$/mo). - TunnelBear supports up to 5 connections per account vs 2. I use TunnelBear regularly for my browser and phone. Both works great. My subscription is going to expire soon and I'll be open to try other VPN providers, not that there is anything wrong with TunnelBear. Any recommendations? This site [2] has f…
How does this compare to TunnelBear [1]? - TunnelBear is a bit more expensive (4.99$/mo, paid annually vs 4$/mo). - TunnelBear supports up to 5 connections per account vs 2. I use TunnelBear regularly for my browser and phone. Both works great. My subscription is going to expire soon and I'll be open to try other VPN providers, not that there is anything wrong with TunnelBear. Any recommendations? This site [2] has f…
HN gets regular "what VPN should I use?" questions and my answer is always the same: Algo [1]. It is designed to be simple to set up, simple to tear down, and usable with numerous cloud providers or your own Linux server. [1] https://github.com/trailofbits/algo
Pros:
- You can choose a VPS provider close to your network for better speed.
- Less likely to be blacklisted.
- No connection limits
- Not as anonymous to governments or IP-based tracking.Earlier quoted context omitted.
private internet access appears to be good, but I do not think they are very transparent about their operation.
I found malware in the PIA installer. Not sure if it was planted by PIA themselves or I was subjected to a MITM attack, and so I would never use any bespoke VPN software again. Best just downloading the OpenVPN config files and plug them into something like Viscosity[0] (which I trust over the more bespoke VPN clients made by the VPN providers themselves). [0]: https://www.sparklabs.com/viscosity/
On macOS, I just created a new "PIA" service in Network. Is there any reason to use Viscosity instead of the macOS VPN client?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HN gets regular "what VPN should I use?" questions and my answer is always the same: Algo [1]. It is designed to be simple to set up, simple to tear down, and usable with numerous cloud providers or your own Linux server. [1] https://github.com/trailofbits/algo
In terms of privacy, doesn't it kind of let the cat out of the bag if you host your own VPN server? It's not your home address, but it's still just as much an address associated with you, isn't it?