4 ms·
To be honest all a VPN does is add another layer of protection. It's not that secure because they can be subpoenaed or NSL'ed into giving data over, which is wh
by arca_vorago 9y ago
To be honest all a VPN does is add another layer of protection. It's not that secure because they can be subpoenaed or NSL'ed into giving data over, which is why a VPN's log policy is important to pay attention to. So in reality, you are mostly just trying to not reveal traffic to your ISP which the various LEA's can get access to far too easily (read: without a warrant).
For those really serious about privacy that's why I think actually owning a colo space where you own and control the hardware can be a preferable solution. For those who don't like that try setting up your own VPN on a VPS, etc.
One of the key things most people miss is DNS. I personally also suggest running your own DNS server, even if just a local dnsmasq that's outgoing to opendns or internic or something.
One more thing most people don't think about is attackers pivoting from other compromised devices on the internal network. If you think that Amazon/Apple/Microsoft etc device isn't sending checks out on the local network and then reporting back stuff like internal IP topology and MAC addresses you got another thing comin. Check your iptables or nftables (bpf?) and block internal hosts you know don't need access.
- jerheinze 9y agoWhy use paid privacy-by-policy systems when you can use free privacy-by-design systems like Tor and i2p?
- aurelianito 9y agoLatency and throughput
- jerheinze 9y ago> Latency and throughput It's not as bad as you're making it seem.
- aurelianito 9y agoThis is a choice you don't make to get. Each one might take different choices on the latency-throughput/privacy trade-off. Given the current usage, I would say that most people value the latency and throughput a lot.