privacyguides/privacytools.io
Archived
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 304 Pull Requests 47 Activity

Addition of reponsible marketing section #1538

Merged
dngray merged 3 commits from pr-reponsible_vpn_marketing into master 2019-11-29 16:52:22 +00:00
Conversation 9 Commits 3 Files Changed 1 +4
1 changed files with 4 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
Showing only changes of commit 7455f2d775 - Show all commits

4
pages/providers/vpn.html
View File

@@ -130,6 +130,10 @@ description: "Find a no-logging VPN operator who isn't out to sell or read your
</div>
<div class="col-md-6">
<p><strong>Minimum to Qualify:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Must self host analytics (no Google Analytics etc). Options like <a href="https://matomo.org">Matomo</a> are perfect for this as they allow a provider to know information about how users use their site. The provider's site must also comply with <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track">DNT (Do Not Track)</a> for those users who want to opt-out.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<p>Must not have any marketing which is irresponsible:</p>
<ul>
<li>Making guarantees of protecting anonymity 100%. When someone makes a claim that something is 100% it means there is no certainty for failure. We know users can quite easily deanonymize themselves in a number of ways, eg:</li>
dngray commented 2019-11-29 11:06:01 +00:00 (Migrated from github.com)
Review
Copy Link

In the case of

Mullvad:
I don't think that is inaccurate at all. What they are talking about is eavesdropping on a shared WiFi access point. The word "even" is should probably be omitted.

ProtonVPN:
Once again it talks about shared networks and untrusted Internet connections. This is the whole reason you'd use a VPN, ie to prevent your ISP from seeing what you're doing, or local administrator.

IVPN:
That's not totally wrong either. If I am on a VPN server with 1000 other users, it's certainly more anonymous than if I connected directly.

The thing none of these providers claim, is that their product will provide 100% anonymity. I have no problems with VPN providers claiming to keep you secure on untrusted networks.

This is assuming you trust their network to not eavesdrop on you. There is no substitution for E2EE and TLS in that case.

In the case of Mullvad: I don't think that is inaccurate at all. What they are talking about is eavesdropping on a shared WiFi access point. The word "even" is should probably be omitted. ProtonVPN: Once again it talks about shared networks and untrusted Internet connections. This is the whole reason you'd use a VPN, ie to prevent your ISP from seeing what you're doing, or local administrator. IVPN: That's not totally wrong either. If I am on a VPN server with 1000 other users, it's certainly more anonymous than if I connected directly. The thing *none* of these providers claim, is that their product will provide 100% anonymity. I have no problems with VPN providers claiming to keep you secure on untrusted networks. This is assuming you trust *their* network to not eavesdrop on you. There is no substitution for E2EE and TLS in that case.