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

Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 95 posts

Re: Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

#81

Post by Fnoord »

bartbutler wrote: post #55
Fnoord wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd prefer it if it used some kind of way to proxy traffic through WireGuard instead (which ProtonVPN does not yet support while they should if not just for performance reasons alone [1]) [1] https://www.wireguard.com/performance/

It is something we'd like to do, but it's still a little experimental and it hasn't gotten to the top of our priority list yet.

If you need a beta tester, let me know. I already am a paid subscriber, but I am considering quitting ProtonVPN because this feature is lacking and more and more competitors are catching up on it.

Re: Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

#82

Post by Kaveren »

tom4000 wrote: post #75

Why Proton VPN and not something privacy friendly? As ProtonVPN like NordVPN is run by Tesonet is has the same issues. Why does Mozilla trust in Tesonet and why should their users do? http://vpnscam.com/heres-why-you-cant-trust-nordvpn-and-prot...

ProtonVPN is simply the best choice for a VPN if your goal includes anonymity / privacy; I place zero stock in this.

1. No other VPN that I'm aware of has any of its own data center infrastructure.

2. Even though ProtonVPN (and essentially all VPNs) works with untrustworthy companies like Leaseweb to provide many of their servers, SecureCore allows you to route traffic through their own data center infrastructure to another exit node server.

3. Public-facing CEO who has a verifiable history. You know his name, his face, he's given a talk. This helps with accountability.

I've said it before on HN and I'll say it again, their reply to this situation satisfied me completely, and nobody has said anything against this reply: https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtonVPN/comments/8ww4h2/protonvpn...

There is simply not a better option than ProtonVPN.

Yes, I sound like a shill, but the facts are still the facts.

Re: Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

#83

Post by ionised »

tehduder9 wrote: post #31
BoysenberryPi wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I must be the only one who thought this was a non-issue. A molehill turned into a mountain.

I bet you'd be screaming hell if chrome would have done it.

Not really. We expect shitty things from Google at this point.

Re: Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

#84

Post by Karunamon »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #70
Karunamon wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I tell everyone that tries to defend this, it's not about what the plugin did or didn't do. It could have literally been a copy of about:blank, it changes nothing. The entirely justified outrage was its purpose for being put there (which boils down to advertising) and the lack of consent for its being put there. That's it.

Doing nothing is not advertising. The only way for this to be used in advertisement was from Mr. Robot fans to Firefox. > lack of consent Pretend it was a copy of about:blank when you answer this question: What makes this different from the giant pile of patches merged into each release of firefox that you don't read?

How many of those Firefox patches are advertising references to then-popular media as opposed to new features, security fixes, and so forth?

Again. Purpose.

Re: Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

#85

Post by Dylan16807 »

Karunamon wrote: post #84
Dylan16807 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing nothing is not advertising. The only way for this to be used in advertisement was from Mr. Robot fans to Firefox. > lack of consent Pretend it was a copy of about:blank when you answer this question: What makes this different from the giant pile of patches merged into each release of firefox that you don't read?

How many of those Firefox patches are advertising references to then-popular media as opposed to new features, security fixes, and so forth? Again. Purpose .

That's not answering why it would be wrong even if it was about:blank.

Re: Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

#86

Post by kiriakasis »

svrtknst wrote: post #65
BoysenberryPi wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I must be the only one who thought this was a non-issue. A molehill turned into a mountain.

No, I agree at least. I mean, it was a bad move and thoroughly short-sighted, but then again - what's the score? One slight privacy infraction from Mozilla, vs. the countless others from Google, or Facebook, or whatever. It wasn't a good move, it also wasn't as bad as people make it out to be, and it's defeinitely better than any competition.

> One slight privacy infraction from Mozilla

It was a breach of trust, but there was no privacy infraction.

Re: Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

#87

Post by Dylan16807 »

Karunamon wrote: post #84
Dylan16807 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doing nothing is not advertising. The only way for this to be used in advertisement was from Mr. Robot fans to Firefox. > lack of consent Pretend it was a copy of about:blank when you answer this question: What makes this different from the giant pile of patches merged into each release of firefox that you don't read?

How many of those Firefox patches are advertising references to then-popular media as opposed to new features, security fixes, and so forth? Again. Purpose .

(I'm making this a separate post because I don't want any distractions in the other one.)

If they had done it correctly, it would have been invisible and it would not have advertised anything to firefox users. That is the purpose. It showing up the way it did was an oversight.

Re: Mozilla Announces Experimental Partnership with ProtonVPN

#90

Post by Skunkleton »

Fnoord wrote: post #59
Skunkleton wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to be a pain in the ass, I fired up elinks to type this response.

Just to be a pain in the ass, ELinks has known vulnerabilities. The last stable release was from 2009, and the last pre-release from 2012 [1]. At the very, very least it has vulnerabilities in SpiderMonkey. If you need a console browser with picture, JS, color, and table support, consider Browsh [2] instead: "Browsh is a fully-modern text-based browser. It renders anything that a modern browser can; HTML5, CSS3, JS,…

You are a pain in the ass! Thanks. I will look at updating my text-based browsing habits :)

Edit: I've been snookered! This is just a text rendering front end for firefox. This invalidates the point I was trying to make. I am sad now.

Post reply on HN