(no title)
nuclx | 3 years ago
It's either your ISP or the VPN provider, which can log the websites you have visited, so there isn't a clear advantage of using a VPN. Sure the VPN provider may claim to log nothing, but that's hard to confirm and not proven to be true in some cases (related thread regarding Protonmail: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28443449).
For researching confidential topics, TOR appears to be fine. VPN may have better network bandwidth, or may be blocked from less websites than TOR exit nodes I guess.
modeless|3 years ago
In contrast I can choose any VPN provider in the world. It's a competitive market and they have strong incentives to respect privacy because it's one of their main selling points. Any VPN that is discovered to not be respecting privacy will lose a lot of business in short order.
Sure you can say that they can violate privacy in secret, but that's a big risk for them. It's no risk at all for an ISP because their customers have no choice. It's no guarantee, but it's definitely a better situation to use a company that actually has incentives aligned with yours.
ziddoap|3 years ago
That answers it for many people, I would guess. Even without censorship, many ISPs have a much worse track-record for gathering and subsequently selling information than, say, Mullvad does.
Is it an absolute that Mullvad doesn't log/sell information? No, of course not. But they make a much more convincing case than my ISP does.
Geoblock avoiding is another common answer. My ISP also sends out letters if you torrent, which can be annoying to receive - Mullvad alleviates that.
nuclx|3 years ago
[0] https://www.stitcher.com/show/cypherpunk-bitstream
0daystock|3 years ago
That's not the only deciding factor though, is it? Mullvad (not singling them out, but just for sake of illustration) is in many ways is more attractive to bad actors because it centralizes users seeking privacy. On top of that, you're adding additional software and network complexity which equals attack surface. There's more to consider than what appears at face value when considering whether a VPN is appropriate.
dotnet00|3 years ago
On top of that there's also the value of just having privacy even if the ISP can be trusted. E.g. I might not mind being seen naked by a friend, but I would still prefer for that to not happen.
In general I think a lot of the big providers who have gone without incidents (and without major changes) for a long time can be trusted. I feel the incidents with Proton were somewhat overblown, since their page on legal notices received did mention that they could be compelled to log IP addresses (or at least that's how I remembered it). But even without that, I think Mullvad has been pushing for "system transparency" where users can verify all the software that's running on their servers, which is a step in the right direction towards providing confidence that they are indeed not logging anything.
sgillen|3 years ago
I’ve had it where I was served an add from a server that had previously been implicated in a bot net operation. The university told me I was infected and that my computer was not allowed back on the network until I came in person to show them that I had done a full wipe and reinstall of my OS.
jiveturkey|3 years ago
I personally use it to evade IP-based tracking, for random example LinkedIn. Try browsing LI from your home. LI will suggest that you connect to others in your home. Even though I have a fake LI profile, not linked to other members of my household, so this doesn't actually invade my privacy, it's still yucky that they maintain a shadow connection between us. There are tons of sites/services that do this kind of simple yet invasive tracking.
I also use it in rare cases for torrenting or downloading content. I normally have other methods for torrenting and seeding privately but in some cases I want another level of privacy (nothing illegal/bad/censor worthy, and therefore would be ok with law enforcement connecting the dots through VPN), a level that VPN serves well.
I am glad that the VPN providers sell people on nonsense, on protections they can't guarantee (to Western countries anyway). This makes the service actually available at all. To me it's an analog of the https-everywhere cargo cult, that makes it super easy these days to get a free SSL cert.
No technology is perfect. It doesn't make it useless.
V1ndaar|3 years ago
For example Formula 1 has F1TV that you can only sign up for in some countries (where they didn't sell out to Sky essentially).
Like, I don't even mind paying for a service if it's good and actually available!
InCityDreams|3 years ago
leodriesch|3 years ago
flatiron|3 years ago
topdancing|3 years ago
I find it's a convenient way to prevent services beyond my ISP from knowing where am I based on IP address.
All of those apps you have on your devices presumably have permanent connections back to their servers and they can very easily tell if you're at home, out on mobile data, in an office, or in a cafe/public library or even in a different country.
With a VPN, they currently think I'm in Dallas; which I'm nowhere near right now.
0daystock|3 years ago
zucker42|3 years ago
Therefore, you are trading trusting your ISP for trusting your VPN, but at least you are getting someone who says they care about your privacy (rather than someone who has a track record of not caring) and someone who would face significant business repercussions if they became untrusted, rather than someone that would face almost no business repercussions.
photon-torpedo|3 years ago
Current example: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31248250
pluc|3 years ago
f38zf5vdt|3 years ago
Try routing all your traffic through TOR and trying to navigate the modern web or common apps. It is _extremely_ punishing when you connect through TOR exit nodes.
flatiron|3 years ago
ulzeraj|3 years ago