this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
784 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59402 readers
3602 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Anyone pro-Mullvad that can explain to me how it's better than PIA?

To my knowledge, which may be wrong, PIA has faster speeds and is also entirely RAM-based.

That said...I'd gladly switch if that's untrue and Mullvad is better. On the outset, it sounds like Mullvad triggers search engine captchas less, which would be a nice win.

edit: Well, you all convinced me. Made the switch.

[–] Virual@lemmy.dbzer0.com 57 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

PIA and Mullvad should have equal speeds because they both have 10gbps servers and wireguard. Both PIA and Mullvad use ram-only servers exclusively. As for search engine captchas, I never get them with Mullvad. The main issue with PIA is that they were bought by a questionable company that previously developed adware. You can read about that here. Personally, I would never use a privacy tool that is owned by an ad company, even if they claim to have changed. I used them up until the acquisition, then switched and have been extremely happy with Mullvad.

[–] serratur@lemmy.wtf 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

PIA is also a US based company

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Just a bad juju acronymn.

Pain in the ass, CIA.

[–] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

You're awesome. Thank you! Appreciate the info and response. I'll give Mullvad a throw.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I used PIA for years and dropped them over this. Am now on Mullvad. So far everything’s great.

[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As for search engine captchas, I never get them with Mullvad.

That has nothing to do with VPNs, and everything to do with how your browser “leaks” your user behaviour history.

Captchas go through your browser behaviour history and examine the clicks and pages you have gone through, how long you were on each one and how you scrolled through each page. Stuff like that. If that browser behaviour history reaches a minimum threshold of “human-like behaviour”, there is no test to pass. If it doesn’t, or there is no history to go after, you get a test.

[–] Virual@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago

The IP address that a request is coming from can absolutely cause captchas to be triggered. If the host is seeing a lot of bot activity from your IP, it'll do that. That and blacklisting is why Mullvad rotates IPs.

[–] httpjames@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] t0m5k1@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Teddy Sagi > Kape Tech > PIA, Cyber Ghost and ZenMate.

As someone who works in enterprise ISP tech space I always keep the bigger picture in mind, especially with the latest "tech Fads", VPNs are really easy to sell, especially when you already have other companies and even bigger shell companies.

Take the following scenario (it might be true it might also be conjecture):

person1 owns 2 shell companies that are big names in tech.

shell 1 starts out as a an ISP and soon grows to be a network transit provider.*

shell 2 starts out as a cyber sec company.

shell 1 get's really big and becomes a tier 1 provider that sells transit to BBC and is now peering with the likes of Cogent, Lumen/CenturyLink and others.

shell 2 get so big it branches out into VPN carrier tech and purchases a well used VPN company that also stands out as having a no logging policy.*

shell 1 starts providing seriously detailed analytics to it peers on a subscription basis with discounts to peers that repeatedly hit the 95th percentile on billing cycles, all the peers love being able to see detailed info of the traffic flowing over their transit relationships.*

Shell 2 also purchases another company that deals with adware and advert injection tech.

later shell 2 becomes so financially liquid it is now breaking out in to gambling and lucrative AIM ventures.

In the scenario above I've marked points with a * that should be red flags to VPN users BUT they have something obvious when laid out in this manner that a user of a VPN would not know. That is that even though the VPN is sold as no-logging the wider company still gets your data as all the traffic is flowing over the wider network owned by shell 1 that you have no idea of the relationship between them.

All traffic/data can be monetised and ultimately with decent visibility of all comprising parts tied back to you or your account, VPNs are good but just be aware of forced perspective, look beyond T&C's, look at the company and who owns it and what else they own.

You all got a hint at this with pirate bay, the feds couldn't take 'em down so the went to the DC provider and the network transit providers, you should do the same if you value your trust and data so much that you need a VPN for every connection.

Finally, with or without a VPN, Your IP is only used for 20% of the connection(10% at the start and 10% to the final endpoint), when your data/traffic flows over provider networks it becomes an AS number, a layer tag and even a colour, all of these interchange until it becomes an IP again, hits a website and for the most part all of that is accounted for and can be connected to you.

[–] punkisundead@slrpnk.net 12 points 1 year ago

You can send Mullvad cash as payment method