3 ms·

From the third paragraph of the article: > It's designed to run Chrome browser connections through two proxies, one operated by Google and one operated by a th

From the third paragraph of the article: > It's designed to run Chrome browser connections through two proxies, one operated by Google and one operated by a third-party (eg, Cloudflare), so that the true public IP address of the user is obscured, hopefully thwarting attempts to track them around the web using that address.

justinclift 3y ago
Reading the front page the of GitHub repo with the Chrome "IP Protection" source code, it has this worrying statement: We are considering using 2 hops for improved privacy. A second proxy would be run by an external CDN ... https://github.com/GoogleChrome/ip-protection https://github.com/GoogleChrome/ip-protection "Considering" means "we're thinking about it, but it's in no way final". Sounds like Google could implement a proxy solution but decide the 2nd hop for improved privacy isn't needed after all. Or make it optional, defaulting to OFF, etc.
- buremba 3y ago
  ^ This is an important "detail".
eli 3y ago
In other words what apple has been doing for years now
AnthonyMouse 3y ago
Wouldn't this be useful as a way to avoid getting blocked or having to do a thousand CAPTCHAs when using Tor? Access the relay via Tor, the relay doesn't know who you are because of Tor, the website sees you as someone using the relay which is too many ordinary people to block.
- mindslight 3y ago
  Yes, but such proxies will likely require authentication with a Google account, and Google will keep an audit log to prevent "abuse". So at best it works out for maintaining somewhat persistent nyms for well-scoped purposes (that you make with a burner SIM or buy from someone who did), but not as some panacea for Internet privacy. This is of course assuming that the roadmap for these proxies isn't tied into their push for remote attestation ala "Safety" Net and WEI, in which case your "nym" becomes the entire device.

justinclift 3y ago

Reading the front page the of GitHub repo with the Chrome "IP Protection" source code, it has this worrying statement: We are considering using 2 hops for improved privacy. A second proxy would be run by an external CDN ... https://github.com/GoogleChrome/ip-protection https://github.com/GoogleChrome/ip-protection "Considering" means "we're thinking about it, but it's in no way final". Sounds like Google could implement a proxy solution but decide the 2nd hop for improved privacy isn't needed after all. Or make it optional, defaulting to OFF, etc.

buremba 3y ago
^ This is an important "detail".

eli 3y ago

In other words what apple has been doing for years now

AnthonyMouse 3y ago

Wouldn't this be useful as a way to avoid getting blocked or having to do a thousand CAPTCHAs when using Tor? Access the relay via Tor, the relay doesn't know who you are because of Tor, the website sees you as someone using the relay which is too many ordinary people to block.

mindslight 3y ago
Yes, but such proxies will likely require authentication with a Google account, and Google will keep an audit log to prevent "abuse". So at best it works out for maintaining somewhat persistent nyms for well-scoped purposes (that you make with a burner SIM or buy from someone who did), but not as some panacea for Internet privacy. This is of course assuming that the roadmap for these proxies isn't tied into their push for remote attestation ala "Safety" Net and WEI, in which case your "nym" becomes the entire device.