41 ms·

Could not agree more. They have a clever idea but they are not clear about how it works. What caught me onto it was seeing what they offered as 'premium' featu

Could not agree more. They have a clever idea but they are not clear about how it works. What caught me onto it was seeing what they offered as 'premium' features. These basically involved not being a peer! They have clarified things a little but to the uninitiated, being a 'helper' sounds like a good thing!

Jake232 11y ago
I think they could have made it clearer, and changing up their FAQ didn't exactly make a great impression on a lot of users. That said; I think providing they tell users about this upfront, and don't waste their bandwidth on mobile connections etc (as they say they don't) - then I see no problem with this. It's a way for users to get a VPN for "free". For most end-users they won't even notice/care about the odd HTTP request they're proxying. I think transparency may have been the issue here.
- thefreeman 11y ago
  > For most end-users they won't even notice/care about the odd HTTP request they're proxying. I'm pretty sure people would care if the cops showed up because that odd HTTP request happened to requesting child pornography.
  - Jake232 11y ago
    That is a risk they take. That's what I was saying about transparency. If the Hola website made had made the whole situation more obvious, then users either take this risk or pay the $X a month for an actual VPN service.
    - joepie91_ 11y ago
      The problem is that that goes against Hola's own (commercial) interests.
  - kristofferR 11y ago
    Is CP on the clearnet really still a "thing"?
    - DanBC 11y ago
      Yes, images of child sexual abuse still exist on regular Internet, no darknet services required.
ziahamza 11y ago
Its not just about being a helper. All peers have complete access to each other's machine, not just to initiate http requests. It even allows peers to download files from each other, and steal other personal information. Its just insanely stupid to come anywhere near this software. They should immediately patch the software, well before changing FAQs.

Jake232 11y ago

I think they could have made it clearer, and changing up their FAQ didn't exactly make a great impression on a lot of users. That said; I think providing they tell users about this upfront, and don't waste their bandwidth on mobile connections etc (as they say they don't) - then I see no problem with this. It's a way for users to get a VPN for "free". For most end-users they won't even notice/care about the odd HTTP request they're proxying. I think transparency may have been the issue here.

thefreeman 11y ago
> For most end-users they won't even notice/care about the odd HTTP request they're proxying. I'm pretty sure people would care if the cops showed up because that odd HTTP request happened to requesting child pornography.
- Jake232 11y ago
  That is a risk they take. That's what I was saying about transparency. If the Hola website made had made the whole situation more obvious, then users either take this risk or pay the $X a month for an actual VPN service.
  - joepie91_ 11y ago
    The problem is that that goes against Hola's own (commercial) interests.
- kristofferR 11y ago
  Is CP on the clearnet really still a "thing"?
  - DanBC 11y ago
    Yes, images of child sexual abuse still exist on regular Internet, no darknet services required.

ziahamza 11y ago

Its not just about being a helper. All peers have complete access to each other's machine, not just to initiate http requests. It even allows peers to download files from each other, and steal other personal information. Its just insanely stupid to come anywhere near this software. They should immediately patch the software, well before changing FAQs.