Przejdź do głównej zawartości


What is your opinion on #Mullvad #VPN?
- robustness
- trustworthiness
- cost effectivity?

I am a moderately paranoid EU user, seeking good protection against retrofitted criminalization.

in reply to 8Petros [$ rm -rv /capitalism/*]

the best and the cheapest good VPN.
Mullvad cons: show streaming sites (ex. Netflix, HBO GO) doesn't work
in reply to 8Petros [$ rm -rv /capitalism/*]

@8petros, it seemed robust and cost effective enough (I only rented a month to evade geolocation censorship and buy some music), but if you’re to trust something that has 100% of your browsing behaviors, you might as well just trust your ISP.
in reply to MortSinyx

You just pointed out where is the usability of VPN and obviously _anonymization_ is not. Nobody claims that.
in reply to 8Petros [$ rm -rv /capitalism/*]

@8petros, a virtual public network has your IP and the servers you connect to (assuming TLS). It may claim that it does not do anything funny with that data, and you’ll have to take its words for it, the same for ISP, so no, don’t rely on it to protect you against anything. Geolocation evasion is the only valid use case and it does not come with any additional privacy benefit.
in reply to MortSinyx

That is not 100% true. As you refer to the idea of VPN in general, consider political and legal differences. In a country where abortion is severely criminalized (including helping with, informing about etc.), one may risk being interrogated, or shortlisted just because they seek information or browse sites like fourthievesvinegar.org/abortio… Going through VPN located in a jurisdiction where regulations are more favorable is unlikely to create such risk. Of course, such a case can be interpreted as an extended variant of geolocation, but I think it isn't.

My major interest in terms of “trustworthiness” is whether they stick to their TOS. I would never rely on _a single_ security measure, but if they do what they say they do, their service is _a known_ component of the whole compound.

in reply to 8Petros [$ rm -rv /capitalism/*]

@8petros, my point was that we hand the provider a lot of data and there’s no way you can verify if it sticks to their TOS. In case it doesn’t, such data can be bought off by (data brokers who sell to) parties wishing to harm you, be it a jurisdiction wishing to put you in jail or advertisers wanting to manipulate you. You can speculate a provider’s motives, but that’s just gambling, the opposite of the safety you’re looking for.
in reply to MortSinyx

Even if they do intend to stick to their ToS, a legal injuction may force them to give up your info without telling you. Or they can just be breached, which seems really common among commercial #VPN providers.

For

#vpn
in reply to MortSinyx

Please consider that you do not really know what I am looking for, apart from what I explicitly wrote here. Whatever you assume, extrapolate or guess is just your opinion. I am all into civilized conversation about pros and cons of any given solution. But if you start breaching my borders by telling me (without knowing it) what I have in mind, I will quit our contact.
in reply to MortSinyx

On the other hand, “gambling” is essentially taking decisions based on incomplete information, and this is what we (humans) do most of the time. So.
in reply to tyil

The queue of people who want to tell me what do or not do is rather long, I am afraid. I may book you a slot some time half next year. Interested?
in reply to 8Petros [$ rm -rv /capitalism/*]

It'd be a lot shorter if you'd stop trying to be part of some group because it's hip or whatever your reason is to want to be seen as "paranoid".