3 ms·

At this point the access points and the global data and surveillance system is too complicated and interconnected to dis-intermediate the access point and the n

At this point the access points and the global data and surveillance system is too complicated and interconnected to dis-intermediate the access point and the network itself That is to say you cannot even connect to IP addresses unless you’re already part of the global whitelist for APs Try yourself. Get a VPN and then connect from certain regions and to won’t get very far and you’ll be slooooow You’ll say, oh, that’s because bad actors and are therefore blacklisted - and now you’re back to the same problem: their resource is being limited by some social structure that is by definition constrained You cannot differentiate the broader system from the access point, so long as the system controls which access point access then it doesn’t matter what you do The only solution is to build an entirely new Internet from scratch, not controlled by the people currently google, amazon, cloud flare, respective ISPs, Netflix, etc… The Internet is 99% controlled by a small set of corporations that most people haven’t heard of Just try launching a competitive DNS service and see how far you get

spacebanana7 2y ago
It all depends what your privacy threat model is. There are very few organisations capable of identifying the human user behind a Mullvad connection with a VM. If you're worried about local law enforcement or advertisers it's probably enough.
- hughesjj 2y ago
  I'm more worried about future shakeouts and the end of anonymity, one ASN at a time. We're currently relying on AS' who 'play ball' with anonymous users, but that's not a requirement for AS operators by any means.
- sanroot99 2y ago
  Isp often sell data, ip can be deanonymized by buying data from different data brokers and triangulating the ip.
sneilan1 2y ago
> The Internet is 99% controlled by a small set of corporations that most people haven’t heard of I would love to know more if you have time to elaborate.
- codexb 2y ago
  See this post that talks about how hosting email yourself doesn't really work anymore, despite it being an open internet standard -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437 Not sure about people never hearing about them, but the internet is no longer a network of sparsely distributed connected machines hosting and consuming content as it was originally designed. The content is all hosted on very small set of networks controlled by just a few companies -- Amazon AWS, Google, MS Azure, etc. The consumers access the internet through clients that are also controlled by these companies, and so it's easy for them to exclude other networks and hosts even though the network specification is technically "open".
  - metalliqaz 2y ago
    personal email failed because email is a flawed system that was initially designed to work in a trusted environment free of bad actors I'm as worried about massive platforms playing gatekeepers as much as the next guy, but it's also fairly clear to see that any service that isn't constantly moderated will be overcome with a flood of malicious crap. it practically guarantees closed platforms will proliferate
    - codexb 2y ago
      I generally agree with you, but there’s a difference between a closed platform, and a platform that prevents you from using any other platforms.
      - AndrewKemendo 2y ago
        Every platform that has an controlled access point, which to be clear is the entirety of the public DNS system, is by default a closed platform There do not exist open HTTPS gateways for all of the major internet services such that anyone can connect - They’re *all* mediated by some access control gatekeeper, it’s like one of the core functions of the current Internet routing system is to not allow for infinite anonymous peers like you would see in TOR or other anonymized routing services You can say that this should be the case or not but it’s just the facts It’s precisely the same argument as: “We have plenty of water fountains, As long as you look white then you can use them all you want.”
Aurornis 2y ago
> That is to say you cannot even connect to IP addresses unless you’re already part of the global whitelist for APs > Try yourself. Get a VPN and then connect from certain regions and to won’t get very far and you’ll be slooooow Connecting to a far away VPN doesn’t prove anything about a “global whitelist” VPN addresses are commonly rate limited and block listed because they’re sources of abusive traffic and therefore trigger all of the common defense mechanisms. Anyone who has run a forum or other service long enough knows that the spammers and the people trying to evade bans love their VPNs. VPN services are also oversubscribed, leading to poor performance. Connecting to far away locations also causes throughput problems, especially if the country has poor internet infrastructure. Your connection has to round trip into and back out of that country to get to many services, meaning performance can be very poor. > Just try launching a competitive DNS service and see how far you get You’ll probably get as far as realizing that it’s an extraordinarily expensive venture to operate with no possibility of income, at which point you’d shut it down unless your hobby is lighting money on fire. There isn’t a conspiracy in this.
- AndrewKemendo 2y ago
  I’m glad we agree so throughly though I’m not sure what you’re referencing with a conspiracy
- immibis 2y ago
  That's what they said, yes. Only certain access points are whitelisted to access things. If you aren't using one then you're blacklisted. VPNs aren't one. You claim there isn't a global whitelist and then proceed to explain a global whitelist.
  - dTal 2y ago
    > Only certain access points are whitelisted to access things. If you aren't using one then you're blacklisted. No, this is not how these terms work. Blacklist and whitelist are not just words for opposite sides of a partitioned set. Both blacklists and whitelists are explicitly enumerated lists. If I blacklist a single thing, I have not implicitly created a whitelist containing everything else in the universe. Establishing that VPNs are often blacklisted is not - at all! - the same thing as establishing the existence of a "global whitelist".

spacebanana7 2y ago

It all depends what your privacy threat model is. There are very few organisations capable of identifying the human user behind a Mullvad connection with a VM. If you're worried about local law enforcement or advertisers it's probably enough.

hughesjj 2y ago
I'm more worried about future shakeouts and the end of anonymity, one ASN at a time. We're currently relying on AS' who 'play ball' with anonymous users, but that's not a requirement for AS operators by any means.
sanroot99 2y ago
Isp often sell data, ip can be deanonymized by buying data from different data brokers and triangulating the ip.

sneilan1 2y ago

> The Internet is 99% controlled by a small set of corporations that most people haven’t heard of I would love to know more if you have time to elaborate.

codexb 2y ago
See this post that talks about how hosting email yourself doesn't really work anymore, despite it being an open internet standard -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437 Not sure about people never hearing about them, but the internet is no longer a network of sparsely distributed connected machines hosting and consuming content as it was originally designed. The content is all hosted on very small set of networks controlled by just a few companies -- Amazon AWS, Google, MS Azure, etc. The consumers access the internet through clients that are also controlled by these companies, and so it's easy for them to exclude other networks and hosts even though the network specification is technically "open".
- metalliqaz 2y ago
  personal email failed because email is a flawed system that was initially designed to work in a trusted environment free of bad actors I'm as worried about massive platforms playing gatekeepers as much as the next guy, but it's also fairly clear to see that any service that isn't constantly moderated will be overcome with a flood of malicious crap. it practically guarantees closed platforms will proliferate
  - codexb 2y ago
    I generally agree with you, but there’s a difference between a closed platform, and a platform that prevents you from using any other platforms.
    - AndrewKemendo 2y ago
      Every platform that has an controlled access point, which to be clear is the entirety of the public DNS system, is by default a closed platform There do not exist open HTTPS gateways for all of the major internet services such that anyone can connect - They’re *all* mediated by some access control gatekeeper, it’s like one of the core functions of the current Internet routing system is to not allow for infinite anonymous peers like you would see in TOR or other anonymized routing services You can say that this should be the case or not but it’s just the facts It’s precisely the same argument as: “We have plenty of water fountains, As long as you look white then you can use them all you want.”

Aurornis 2y ago

> That is to say you cannot even connect to IP addresses unless you’re already part of the global whitelist for APs > Try yourself. Get a VPN and then connect from certain regions and to won’t get very far and you’ll be slooooow Connecting to a far away VPN doesn’t prove anything about a “global whitelist” VPN addresses are commonly rate limited and block listed because they’re sources of abusive traffic and therefore trigger all of the common defense mechanisms. Anyone who has run a forum or other service long enough knows that the spammers and the people trying to evade bans love their VPNs. VPN services are also oversubscribed, leading to poor performance. Connecting to far away locations also causes throughput problems, especially if the country has poor internet infrastructure. Your connection has to round trip into and back out of that country to get to many services, meaning performance can be very poor. > Just try launching a competitive DNS service and see how far you get You’ll probably get as far as realizing that it’s an extraordinarily expensive venture to operate with no possibility of income, at which point you’d shut it down unless your hobby is lighting money on fire. There isn’t a conspiracy in this.

AndrewKemendo 2y ago
I’m glad we agree so throughly though I’m not sure what you’re referencing with a conspiracy
immibis 2y ago
That's what they said, yes. Only certain access points are whitelisted to access things. If you aren't using one then you're blacklisted. VPNs aren't one. You claim there isn't a global whitelist and then proceed to explain a global whitelist.
- dTal 2y ago
  > Only certain access points are whitelisted to access things. If you aren't using one then you're blacklisted. No, this is not how these terms work. Blacklist and whitelist are not just words for opposite sides of a partitioned set. Both blacklists and whitelists are explicitly enumerated lists. If I blacklist a single thing, I have not implicitly created a whitelist containing everything else in the universe. Establishing that VPNs are often blacklisted is not - at all! - the same thing as establishing the existence of a "global whitelist".