Reworked VPN Providers #1174
No reviewers
Labels
No Label
🔍🤖 Search Engines
approved
dependencies
duplicate
feedback wanted
high priority
I2P
iOS
low priority
OS
Self-contained networks
Social media
stale
streaming
todo
Tor
WIP
wontfix
XMPP
[m]
₿ cryptocurrency
ℹ️ help wanted
↔️ file sharing
⚙️ web extensions
✨ enhancement
❌ software removal
💬 discussion
🤖 Android
🐛 bug
💢 conflicting
📝 correction
🆘 critical
📧 email
🔒 file encryption
📁 file storage
🦊 Firefox
💻 hardware
🌐 hosting
🏠 housekeeping
🔐 password managers
🧰 productivity tools
🔎 research required
🌐 Social News Aggregators
🆕 software suggestion
👥 team chat
🔒 VPN
🌐 website issue
🚫 Windows
👁️ browsers
🖊️ digital notebooks
🗄️ DNS
🗨️ instant messaging (im)
🇦🇶 translations
No Milestone
No Assignees
1 Participants
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: privacyguides/privacytools.io#1174
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
No description provided.
Delete Branch "vpn-recommendations"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
This PR adds a lot of information regarding the factors that go into our VPN provider recommendations.
In this PR, the only recommended provider is Mullvad. I have also chosen to list ProtonVPN and IVPN as "worth mentioning" despite not having public security audits published, a new criteria for inclusion. Because they are not full recommendations, those listings do not include links to their homepage or to purchase.
I'm considering this the final version of the VPN recommendations until the end of 2019, when we will reevaluate IVPN and ProtonVPN. Therefore, unless someone else has something to add, this PR closes #1139.
Deploy preview for privacytools-io ready!
Built with commit
6d159cd29bhttps://deploy-preview-1174--privacytools-io.netlify.com
I wonder if this would read a bit better if placed above Mullvad?
@ -5,0 +15,4 @@<p><strong>Mullvad</strong> is a fast and inexpensive VPN with a serious focus on transparency and security, they have been in operation since <strong>2009</strong>. It is the only VPN provider that currently meets our criteria for recommendation. Mullvad is based in <span class="flag-icon flag-icon-se"></span> Sweden and does not have a free trial. Visit <a href="https://mullvad.net/">mullvad.net</a> to create an account.</p><h5><span class="badge badge-success">281+ Servers</span></h5><p>Typically the more servers a provider offers, the better: With hundreds of servers in operation, you are far more likely to find a fast connection.</p><h5><span class="badge badge-success">WireGuard Support</span></h5>I wonder if we could add the location count here also for the listed providers?
281+ Servers throughout N Locations?I'm wondering if we should call out for ProtonVPN and IVPN's mobile clients--in these descriptions--whether or not these clients are open-source?
I'm really liking this new layout. Nice work!
So is I guess this is ready for merging?
sounds more like something we could put as a requirement
@ -5,0 +15,4 @@<p><strong>Mullvad</strong> is a fast and inexpensive VPN with a serious focus on transparency and security, they have been in operation since <strong>2009</strong>. It is the only VPN provider that currently meets our criteria for recommendation. Mullvad is based in <span class="flag-icon flag-icon-se"></span> Sweden and does not have a free trial. Visit <a href="https://mullvad.net/">mullvad.net</a> to create an account.</p><h5><span class="badge badge-success">281+ Servers</span></h5><p>Typically the more servers a provider offers, the better: With hundreds of servers in operation, you are far more likely to find a fast connection.</p><h5><span class="badge badge-success">WireGuard Support</span></h5>I thing the locations of the servers don't matter a lot, since its all controlled by one single party anyhow.
well, don't we already have our big red warning for that?
I don't think so, because we have a very similar but much larger warning at the top. This way we have a large warning, then when they read the recommendation they get that reminder, and then if they read the "worth mentioning" providers they'll get to the actual section with even more info on the drawbacks of a VPN.
@ -5,0 +15,4 @@<p><strong>Mullvad</strong> is a fast and inexpensive VPN with a serious focus on transparency and security, they have been in operation since <strong>2009</strong>. It is the only VPN provider that currently meets our criteria for recommendation. Mullvad is based in <span class="flag-icon flag-icon-se"></span> Sweden and does not have a free trial. Visit <a href="https://mullvad.net/">mullvad.net</a> to create an account.</p><h5><span class="badge badge-success">281+ Servers</span></h5><p>Typically the more servers a provider offers, the better: With hundreds of servers in operation, you are far more likely to find a fast connection.</p><h5><span class="badge badge-success">WireGuard Support</span></h5>The number of server locations does matter somewhat, because being able to choose from a more diverse pool, and being able to choose locations closer to yourself geographically will both result in faster speeds and lower latency.
I'm not sure if it would look good in the badges because I tried to keep them short, but I would 100% be open to trying to add it, or adding the number of locations to the text summary below.
Hmm, yes. Are either of them open source?
@ -5,0 +15,4 @@<p><strong>Mullvad</strong> is a fast and inexpensive VPN with a serious focus on transparency and security, they have been in operation since <strong>2009</strong>. It is the only VPN provider that currently meets our criteria for recommendation. Mullvad is based in <span class="flag-icon flag-icon-se"></span> Sweden and does not have a free trial. Visit <a href="https://mullvad.net/">mullvad.net</a> to create an account.</p><h5><span class="badge badge-success">281+ Servers</span></h5><p>Typically the more servers a provider offers, the better: With hundreds of servers in operation, you are far more likely to find a fast connection.</p><h5><span class="badge badge-success">WireGuard Support</span></h5>we could always add in in a later pull request.
after some quick searching, only mullvad seems to be open source.
https://github.com/mullvad/mullvadvpn-app
so are we adding it as a criteria and merge? @JonahAragon
How important do we think this is? I'm satisfied with not adding it as a strict criteria for recommendation. As long as the providers support generic OpenVPN clients, other clients should be considered more of a convenience value.
I would list it as a nice to have rather then strict criteria.
I will merge this PR now, and I'll submit another in a bit with the changes @nitrohorse requested, and I'll redo the criteria list we have. I'll include a "bare minimum" and a "best-case" scenario for each category in our criteria.
perfect :)!