81–90 of 93 posts
I donwt know any single VPN provider apart from Mullvad with proper v6 implementation.
Even Mullvad give out ULA addresses. You can hardly call that a proper implementation :(
I donwt know any single VPN provider apart from Mullvad with proper v6 implementation.
mullvad is the only normie vpn worth using. worth every penny
I have no idea why it seems to be so hard for VPN providers to get IPv6 right. The technology has been here for ages. Also, unlike physical ISPs, VPN providers have no other way to differentiate from each other but getting this sort of things right, so one could except them to be motivated, but no.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even Mullvad give out ULA addresses. You can hardly call that a proper implementation :(
In Context of a VPN Provider like Mullvad a ULA is required. One of the rare cases where ipv6 nat is a thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even Mullvad give out ULA addresses. You can hardly call that a proper implementation :(
Well it's more private. Also there's only one proper IPv6 implementation (using GUAs) and most people.cant get one
Here's a good privacy proxy (VPN) setup: Set up a second wifi router, enable the "Internet kill switch", and connect it with Wireguard to a reputable VPN service. I recommend GL.iNet routers and Mullvad.
With this setup, one can move individual devices between the privacy wifi and identity-broadcasting wifi.
If you can't see your VPN's source code, you can almost safely assume that they're broken in some way.
Even vp.net which says they use SGX to verify the code that is running on a box... yea you are verifying a box, somewhere, not necessarily the one forwarding your packets. And those packets can still be monitored/modified outside the system at some other part of the network anyways.
And even if you could verify all that, eBPF swoops in and lets you modify code at runtime with no evidence trails.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Context of a VPN Provider like Mullvad a ULA is required. One of the rare cases where ipv6 nat is a thing.
NAT might be a thing in Mullvad's case, but there's no link between that and needing ULA.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Given what you said about not using it for anything sensitive, I'm assuming you're not actually logging into your bank... right?
Everything is TLS-encrypted anyway these days, so the primary concern is metadata privacy. When it comes to that, I trust VPN providers about as much as ISPs (i.e. absolutely not).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
mullvad is the only normie vpn worth using. worth every penny
I've yet to see any reason why mullvad is supposed to be particularly trustworthy compared to the alternatives. They aren't doing anything wrong in particular but there's nothing that stands out to me as particularly making them trustworthy
its the only vpn provider (of a handful of not yt sponsor garbo tier) ive tried that saturates my down and uplink completely (1gbit symmetrical!)