4 ms·
The app places the acryonym "VPN" on the phone and instructs users to turn on the virtual private network. I'd say users aren't totally out of line thinking th
by ballenf 9y ago
The app places the acryonym "VPN" on the phone and instructs users to turn on the virtual private network.
I'd say users aren't totally out of line thinking that an app providing virtual private networking functionality would use a layperson's definition of private (as opposed to a techie's definition involving network protocols).
I'd argue that a VPN app that isn't private should be required to put something like the warning on cigarettes: >
> WARNING: This app monitors and records for all time your every action on your phone and only protects you from 3rd parties who haven't paid us enough money to get access to your data.
- codezero 9y agoI agree that a VPN service implies it's protecting privacy, but let me nit pick a bit: the "private" in virtual private network is not about privacy, it's about a network with a private IP space, the virtual part is that it operates on top of public IP space. With that said, anyone could make the assumption that private means privacy here, and most common use cases for consumer VPNs are for privacy, so, I guess it really matters that they are explicit what they service does, and I think the description above is pretty clear.
- mattnewton 9y agoYou and I understand this distinction. The general public that has been told public networks are unsafe probably does not.
- codezero 9y agoYou are completely right, and I agree fully.
- bhhaskin 9y agoA VPN has nothing to do with privacy. Changing the definition doesn't do anyone any favors. It just blurs the line even further. Private!== privacy. It isn't some magical protocol that all of a sudden makes you untrackable.