3 ms·
My ISP is subject to my local laws. Which are not good, in terms of my privacy. My VPN provider is not - but is obviously subject to their local laws. Which ar
by bigiain 5y ago
My ISP is subject to my local laws. Which are not good, in terms of my privacy.
My VPN provider is not - but is obviously subject to their local laws. Which are almost certainly also not good for my privacy either.
Spreading the threat across two different jurisdictions is without doubt "somehow better" than just using my ISP, at least in the case of protection against snooping by non serious crime law enforcement.
(Where I am, organisations like local councils, the taxi commission, fishing inspectors, and dog catchers - can all access our "mandatory telecommunications metal data retention" stuff with very little oversight... While my VPN is still in five eyes, so there's no point pretending national security, intelligence, or serious crime like terrorism/drugtrafficing would have no trouble getting cross jurisdictional access, I'm pretty sure the fishing inspectors or dog catchers won't have that sort of access.)
- drivebycomment 5y agoWhat threat model are you trying to protect from by using VPN, and why is HTTPS + DoH (DNS over HTTPS) not sufficient for that threat model ?
- junon 5y agoBecause not everything uses a bloated, web-first protocol.
- crtasm 5y agoHTTPS still reveals the domain you're requesting, last I checked.
- josephcsible 5y agoThe eSNI/ECH extensions fix that.
- bigiain 5y agoIt can’t fix the problem that it reveals the ip address you’re connecting to though. Even if the sites you’re visiting are all on servers that virtual host heaps of other sites as well, it certainly narrows that haystack down to a handful of bits of hay with your bright shiny needle standing out in the middle.
- crtasm 5y ago...if you manually turn it on in Firefox and the websites you're connecting to support it. I don't know where things stand with other browsers.