4 ms·

So, should they be requested to do so by a formally issued court order, they would comply and start logging a user’s activity, but do not do so by default. Cal

by froddd 2y ago

So, should they be requested to do so by a formally issued court order, they would comply and start logging a user’s activity, but do not do so by default. Calling them worthless at providing secure browsing seems far-fetched; calling them a scam is fully disingenuous.

jhugo 2y ago
What, specifically, is the “secure browsing” that they offer and how does it improve on HTTP over modern TLS? Funnelling your traffic through another entity doesn’t magically increase security.
- froddd 2y ago
  Being able to cover/scramble your actual or virtual location can provide security in some contexts
  - Shared404 2y ago
    It also would prevent your ISP or local attackers from seeing the domains you are reaching out to, which is still visible over https. It's all tradeoffs.
- ang_cire 2y ago
  *Tunneling* it through one hides the nature of that traffic from intermediary systems that it traverses from you up to that VPN exit point. There is a lot of metadata in packets that can be viewed by any interim hop, like your ISP, workplace IT security, ARP-cache-poisoned coffeeshop router, etc.
  - DEADMINCE 2y ago
    > ARP-cache-poisoned coffeeshop router, etc. Eh, that's not really a thing anymore.
    - ang_cire 2y ago
      Not for Starbucks, who does fancy per-user VLANs, but for your local spot that's using an AP-router-combo they bought at Best buy, it sure is.