4 ms·
>What about 'Not in America'? Same advice, buy a VPN if you want the services that it provides. >Because they have 'No logs' policy? Come on, don't be naive.
by deathgrips 6y ago
>What about 'Not in America'?
Same advice, buy a VPN if you want the services that it provides.
>Because they have 'No logs' policy? Come on, don't be naive.
Contract with a VPN that is audited and resides in a legally favorable country. I hesitate to endorse any particular company, but they're out there. Maybe privacy just isn't convenient enough for you.
>So you do agree that the Amercian VPN companies or any American company have double standards when it comes to China?
What are you talking about?
>very outsider in China installs a VPN to access content outside Great Firewall once they arrive
You are allowed to do this at their law enforcement's mercy.
> several U.S. services work without a VPN
Surveillance wouldn't work very well if it made people quit using the services and network.
> I have heard of targeted deportation/arrests at airport, but never heard of random phone seizures at Airports.
I wonder why they don't feel the need to seize phones at airports. As an aside, I recall reading that the PRC forces Uighurs to install spying apps directly to their phones. That is, all the Uighurs who aren't in "Vocational Educational Camps" and have yet to flee to America, where the supposedly oppressive American surveillance state is a breath of fresh air.
- Abishek_Muthian 6y ago>What are you talking about? This - > >Same advice, buy a VPN if you want the services that it provides. >You are allowed to do this at their law enforcement's mercy.
- deathgrips 6y agoOh, I see. Yes. In America you are free to use whatever VPN you pay for, regardless of what country it's hosted in. The NSA won't prohibit it and cannot break it if it's using the right algorithms. If they wanted to intentionally examine your network traffic, that would require a court order. If they wanted to get past your VPN encryption, that would require targeted hacking of a US citizen, which is typically handled by regular law enforcement. The NSA doesn't primarily concern itself with US citizens because investigating them is, in short, a huge pain in the ass. If you have any evidence to the contrary I'd gladly read it.
- srean 6y agoHow hard was it to get that room at AT&T with or without "court order" that you speak about. Do you consider secret courts to be in scope of this discussion. Then there is this That and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposition_Matrix
- deathgrips 6y agoNo court order was necessary because AT&T consented to the NSA presence. Just like how your employer can hand over your corporate laptop to the police without needing a warrant. If you don't like it, consider dealing with another business and encrypting your traffic with a full tunnel VPN. Yes. Secret courts are reasonable due process. Do you have an alternative method that wouldn't release damaging information? Are you interested in talking about surveillance specifically or every talking point of the usual anti-American tirades?
- srean 6y agoSo you agree that court orders are not that fancy a deterrent that you made it out to be. You said > If they wanted to intentionally examine your network traffic, that would require a court order. I just gave you an example when that did not matter. > Are you interested in talking about surveillance specifically or every talking point of the usual anti-American tirades? Whenever you are willing to have an honest discussion rather than a blinkered and intentionally misleading cheerleading
- deathgrips 6y agoThey don't need a court order to sniff packets and do bulk collection. All that data goes into huge data centers. If they want to query that collected data for an American's information, they get a warrant. No human looks at an American's data before getting a warrant. You'd do well to familiarize yourself with their process, which is highly publicized.
- 6y ago