Howdy,

Fiber internet is right around the corner.  Some neighbors are already connected and they working their way to my area.  Once I get connected,
I also want to use a VPN but only for some programs.  Example, I want
Ktorrent and a couple Firefox profiles to use VPNs but at least one
Firefox profile I want to remain outside of VPN.  I watched a few videos
but want to be sure I understand this right.  If I want software to use
a VPN, I put the IP address of the VPN into the proxy settings of the
program and that makes it use the VPN.  If I want it to not use the VPN,
I leave the settings as they are now.  Am I understanding this correctly? 

Also, the package I'm getting is 500Mbs/sec.  What speeds should I
really expect?  If memory serves me right, that is about 50MBs/sec, note
the size of the B.  By the way, that is about 50 times faster than what
I have now.  Also, up and down is the same.  Current up stream is a lot smaller.  Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them.  Now
I can upload videos or something. 

I'm looking at Surfshark and NordVPN.  Both seem to be good and at a
decent price.  Anyone used one or both of these?

Just trying to make sure I'm on the right path. 

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

P. S.  Seamonkey is still not fetching emails automatically, I'm waiting
on a upgrade to see if it gets fixed then.  If not, revive old thread
and bring out the hammer.  ;-) 

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Hey,
NordVPN and Surfshark aren't really considered good VPNs. I'd instead suggest you take a look at Mullvad and IVPN (maybe ProtonVPN too if your threat
model doesn't include governments or any kind of law enforcement). A VPN tunnel basically routes all traffic directed at it to the VPN server, so
you'd probably have to employ something like split tunneling t keep traffic seperate (guide:
https://mullvad.net/en/help/split-tunneling-with-linux-advanced/) (basic guide: https://mullvad.net/en/help/split-tunneling-with-the-mullvad-app/).
And you'll need to always keep in mind that a VPN is a low-level protection. It's enough for protecting yourself against spammers, script kiddies or
similar but it can't keep you private in the face of any high-level threats. Don't place too much trust in VPNs.

Regards,
F. Denkena

Am Samstag, dem 16.07.2022 um 05:57 -0500 schrieb Dale:

Howdy,

Fiber internet is right around the corner.  Some neighbors are already connected and they working their way to my area.  Once I get connected,
I also want to use a VPN but only for some programs.  Example, I want Ktorrent and a couple Firefox profiles to use VPNs but at least one
Firefox profile I want to remain outside of VPN.  I watched a few videos
but want to be sure I understand this right.  If I want software to use
a VPN, I put the IP address of the VPN into the proxy settings of the
program and that makes it use the VPN.  If I want it to not use the VPN,
I leave the settings as they are now.  Am I understanding this correctly? 

Also, the package I'm getting is 500Mbs/sec.  What speeds should I
really expect?  If memory serves me right, that is about 50MBs/sec, note
the size of the B.  By the way, that is about 50 times faster than what
I have now.  Also, up and down is the same.  Current up stream is a lot smaller.  Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them.  Now
I can upload videos or something. 

I'm looking at Surfshark and NordVPN.  Both seem to be good and at a
decent price.  Anyone used one or both of these?

Just trying to make sure I'm on the right path. 

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

P. S.  Seamonkey is still not fetching emails automatically, I'm waiting
on a upgrade to see if it gets fixed then.  If not, revive old thread
and bring out the hammer.  ;-) 

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, 16 July 2022 11:57:25 BST Dale wrote:

Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them. Now I can upload videos or something.

...or run a web server!

--
Regards,
Peter.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 3:57 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

<SNIP>

Also, the package I'm getting is 500Mbs/sec. What speeds should I
really expect? If memory serves me right, that is about 50MBs/sec, note
the size of the B. By the way, that is about 50 times faster than what
I have now. Also, up and down is the same. Current up stream is a lot smaller. Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them. Now
I can upload videos or something.

You will almost certainly get your 500Mb pretty much right away - or
within a day or two. I get 475Mb on my comcast cable connection
but it's rate limited at the other end. They sell and upgrade which
I don't need. At these speeds it's more about bytes/month than
bytes/second so make sure you know how much data you can move
without incurring any extra charges.

As for upload I'm limited at about 13Mb/S. I can upload lots of
data to a Google drive for backups but I have to do it slowly

- Mark

<div dir="ltr"><br><br>On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 3:57 AM Dale &lt;<a href="mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com" target="_blank">rdalek1967@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>&gt;<br>&lt;SNIP&gt;<br>&gt; Also, the package I&#39;m getting is 500Mbs/sec.  What speeds
should I<br>&gt; really expect?  If memory serves me right, that is about 50MBs/sec, note<br>&gt; the size of the B.  By the way, that is about 50 times faster than what<br>&gt; I have now.  Also, up and down is the same.  Current up stream is a lot<

&gt; smaller.  Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them.  Now<br>&gt; I can upload videos or something. <br><div><br></div><div>You will almost certainly get your 500Mb pretty much right away - or </div><div>within a day or two. I

get 475Mb on my comcast cable connection</div><div>but it&#39;s rate limited at the other end. They sell and upgrade which</div><div>I don&#39;t need. At these speeds it&#39;s more about bytes/month than </div><div>bytes/second so make sure you know how
much data you can move</div><div>without incurring any extra charges. </div><div><br></div><div>As for upload I&#39;m limited at about 13Mb/S. I can upload lots of</div><div>data to a Google drive for backups but I have to do it slowly</div><div><br></

<div>- Mark</div></div>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Peter Humphrey wrote:

On Saturday, 16 July 2022 11:57:25 BST Dale wrote:

Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them. Now I can upload >> videos or something.

...or run a web server!

That's way above anything I'd want to tackle.  Heck, this VPN thing is a
bit confusing.  I've never seen it used before so sort of lost with it.  Maybe once installed it will make sense. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, 16 July 2022 18:17:35 BST Dale wrote:

Mark Knecht wrote:

On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 3:57 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com <mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com>> wrote:

<SNIP>

Also, the package I'm getting is 500Mbs/sec. What speeds should I
really expect? If memory serves me right, that is about 50MBs/sec, note the size of the B. By the way, that is about 50 times faster than what
I have now. Also, up and down is the same. Current up stream is a lot smaller. Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them. Now I can upload videos or something.

You will almost certainly get your 500Mb pretty much right away - or
within a day or two. I get 475Mb on my comcast cable connection
but it's rate limited at the other end. They sell and upgrade which
I don't need. At these speeds it's more about bytes/month than
bytes/second so make sure you know how much data you can move
without incurring any extra charges.

As for upload I'm limited at about 13Mb/S. I can upload lots of
data to a Google drive for backups but I have to do it slowly

- Mark

If I understand this correctly, they are stating bits but most data
speeds are commonly in bytes. I read once where one should divide by 8
or 9 to get the true speed in common use. Internet folks use the larger number because it makes it look bigger. If I'm correct, and allowing a little for overhead, I'll see about 50MBs/sec in common use terms. In
other words, using none salesman terms.

1 byte = 8 bits

https://www.gbmb.org/mbps-to-mbs

From what they state, there is no limits. I may be a bit of a heavy
user at first but at some point, hard drive space will slow me down.
I'm a collector of videos and other documents. If I download it, I tend
to keep it unless it is really of no use. I've got videos on appliance repairs, tractor, tree management and just interesting stuff that I
refer back to. It's a lot. Organizing it is also fun.

I'm hoping to get it pretty soon. It's getting really close to me.

Dale

:-) :-)

Regarding VPNs and SOCKS proxy servers, a VPN works at layer 2 or 3 of the OSI model while a SOCKS proxy uses layer 5.

Simply, with VPN you tunnel all your connections to the Interwebs via a remote VPN server which acts as a router (full tunnel mode); or you tunnel some connections via the remote tunnel and some via your local ISP as usual (split tunnel).

With a SOCKS proxy you need to use an application which has a SOCKS client capability, or you can 'socksify' it with a separate piece of software, e.g. privoxy.

As has already been commented, unless you control both ends of a VPN tunnel, you should not assume privacy or anonymity despite marketing claims.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmLS+x8ACgkQseqq9sKV ZxmV1w//bycT0bZ6UE0AYnEIeWyHOH/ndjMCZC1E9nOkQBOnyH4+c/AskEnrMA1q C9H2D0ZnWd9V58TCDmNS/gqTJG9knAl8OKexgFFAJ3T49Z2M9PfDPPXzkQV1361B bO7oiiEpHLiZ3ptktVxFQfGIo0lQ1WRq1SogFqjti2JFWNtlIFAfzBQ2m4ToakPF GJjdFZhg0gxfXv/jY+qUWbs5LABSfBQMSu76DLzC3NAsTTpSo4otNSqwhds2eTkQ OfCPs4TFz59KCW0C01g6gkAr/7DY9APUnPL06RIOCXvaf90cj+RUOabejUMHLA1s qEQZK3QBNKiiCqJt9xK5AtG35ta/NMMbsTXNvzrtRs5zeAQo7t9HzExjVYBWxqWK hua+iOGDEZ0DuNxukyZkc3w8hyHkI8ZvHQWrk0HwqHd3Szem8bi7xKBfwOUDC+Ij e7V32b8aVygPiCiPaqk3wtEuaTW2l9hwxeDMjLr9qkrtxVXovmPPGXqU6ODN4DVj TbXmDDWt24R2EHh7urzOIAqcEjgqcp5PF2yS4QplqR01L/7T7W9vQCXuPgOiHYhb eegkbA4hlUA4KG0CuDgMqb8l0WsAGAlrhH+V2C9A7Z5YUo/LZVidEkfJTMoqe4BA kP9Pddji8iDpbRVgG4ny5+BnuQ+bTck9ez24W9C1TWaqjxyfz6U=
=WF96
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 10:18 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

If I understand this correctly, they are stating bits but most data

speeds are commonly in bytes. I read once where one should divide by 8 or
9 to get the true speed in common use. Internet folks use the larger
number because it makes it look bigger. If I'm correct, and allowing a
little for overhead, I'll see about 50MBs/sec in common use terms. In
other words, using none salesman terms.

From what they state, there is no limits. I may be a bit of a heavy user

at first but at some point, hard drive space will slow me down. I'm a collector of videos and other documents. If I download it, I tend to keep
it unless it is really of no use. I've got videos on appliance repairs, tractor, tree management and just interesting stuff that I refer back to.
It's a lot. Organizing it is also fun.

I'm hoping to get it pretty soon. It's getting really close to me.

Dale

Comcast currently gives me 1.3T bytes/month download. I don't think they
limit my upload because with the low speed or upload no one will ever use
that much.

bits to bytes is *8. I typically use about 200G bytes/month so I'm a long
way from hitting the 1.3T Byte limit. I don't use much 4K video though.

<div dir="ltr"><br><br>On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 10:18 AM Dale &lt;<a href="mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com">rdalek1967@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br><br>&gt;<br>&gt; If I understand this correctly, they are stating bits but most data speeds are commonly in
bytes.  I read once where one should divide by 8 or 9 to get the true speed in common use.  Internet folks use the larger number because it makes it look bigger.  If I&#39;m correct, and allowing a little for overhead, I&#39;ll see about 50MBs/sec in
common use terms.  In other words, using none salesman terms. <br>&gt;<br>&gt; From what they state, there is no limits.  I may be a bit of a heavy user at first but at some point, hard drive space will slow me down.  I&#39;m a collector of videos and
other documents.  If I download it, I tend to keep it unless it is really of no use.  I&#39;ve got videos on appliance repairs, tractor, tree management and just interesting stuff that I refer back to.  It&#39;s a lot.  Organizing it is also fun. <br>
&gt;<br>&gt; I&#39;m hoping to get it pretty soon.  It&#39;s getting really close to me. <br>&gt;<br>&gt; Dale<div><br> <div>Comcast currently gives me 1.3T bytes/month download. I don&#39;t think they limit my upload because with the low speed or
upload no one will ever use that much.</div></div><div><br></div><div>bits to bytes is *8. I typically use about 200G bytes/month so I&#39;m a long way from hitting the 1.3T Byte limit. I don&#39;t use much 4K video though.</div><div><br></div></div>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Mark Knecht wrote:

On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 3:57 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com <mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com>> wrote:

<SNIP>

Also, the package I'm getting is 500Mbs/sec.  What speeds should I
really expect?  If memory serves me right, that is about 50MBs/sec, note the size of the B.  By the way, that is about 50 times faster than what
I have now.  Also, up and down is the same.  Current up stream is a lot smaller.  Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them.  Now I can upload videos or something.

You will almost certainly get your 500Mb pretty much right away - or 
within a day or two. I get 475Mb on my comcast cable connection
but it's rate limited at the other end. They sell and upgrade which
I don't need. At these speeds it's more about bytes/month than 
bytes/second so make sure you know how much data you can move
without incurring any extra charges. 

As for upload I'm limited at about 13Mb/S. I can upload lots of
data to a Google drive for backups but I have to do it slowly

- Mark

If I understand this correctly, they are stating bits but most data
speeds are commonly in bytes.  I read once where one should divide by 8
or 9 to get the true speed in common use.  Internet folks use the larger number because it makes it look bigger.  If I'm correct, and allowing a
little for overhead, I'll see about 50MBs/sec in common use terms.  In
other words, using none salesman terms. 

From what they state, there is no limits.  I may be a bit of a heavy
user at first but at some point, hard drive space will slow me down. 
I'm a collector of videos and other documents.  If I download it, I tend
to keep it unless it is really of no use.  I've got videos on appliance repairs, tractor, tree management and just interesting stuff that I
refer back to.  It's a lot.  Organizing it is also fun. 

I'm hoping to get it pretty soon.  It's getting really close to me. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Mark Knecht wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:CAK2H+edYM+R5kV=dOrGuQ0yzofz8Wdwg62P73fDWg8J2Pi=cCA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<br>
On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 3:57 AM Dale &lt;<a
href="mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">rdalek1967@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&lt;SNIP&gt;<br>
&gt; Also, the package I'm getting is 500Mbs/sec.  What speeds
should I<br>
&gt; really expect?  If memory serves me right, that is about
50MBs/sec, note<br>
&gt; the size of the B.  By the way, that is about 50 times
faster than what<br>
&gt; I have now.  Also, up and down is the same.  Current up
stream is a lot<br>
&gt; smaller.  Basically, I can upload files as fast as I
download them.  Now<br>
&gt; I can upload videos or something. <br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>You will almost certainly get your 500Mb pretty much right
away - or </div>
<div>within a day or two. I get 475Mb on my comcast cable
connection</div>
<div>but it's rate limited at the other end. They sell and
upgrade which</div>
<div>I don't need. At these speeds it's more about bytes/month
than </div>
<div>bytes/second so make sure you know how much data you can
move</div>
<div>without incurring any extra charges. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As for upload I'm limited at about 13Mb/S. I can
upload lots of</div>
<div>data to a Google drive for backups but I have to do it
slowly</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>- Mark</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
If I understand this correctly, they are stating bits but most data
speeds are commonly in bytes.  I read once where one should divide
by 8 or 9 to get the true speed in common use.  Internet folks use
the larger number because it makes it look bigger.  If I'm correct,
and allowing a little for overhead, I'll see about 50MBs/sec in
common use terms.  In other words, using none salesman terms.  <br>
<br>
From what they state, there is no limits.  I may be a bit of a heavy
user at first but at some point, hard drive space will slow me
down.  I'm a collector of videos and other documents.  If I download
it, I tend to keep it unless it is really of no use.  I've got
videos on appliance repairs, tractor, tree management and just
interesting stuff that I refer back to.  It's a lot.  Organizing it
is also fun.  <br>
<br>
I'm hoping to get it pretty soon.  It's getting really close to me. 
<br>
<br>
Dale<br>
<br>
:-)  :-)  <br>
</body>
</html>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

And you'll need to always keep in mind that a VPN is a low-level
protection. It's enough for protecting yourself against spammers, script kiddies or
similar but it can't keep you private in the face of any high-level
threats. Don't place too much trust in VPNs.

I'm not an expert, but AFAIK VPNs don't offer any particular benefit with regards to spam or script kiddies.

A VPN will;
- Hide your internet activity from your ISP
- Make your internet activity available to your VPN provider
- Make your internet activity available to your VPN provider's ISP

Without a VPN, your ISP could sell the details used to sign up for the
account (eg. name, phone number, email address) along with your internet activity. With a VPN, the VPN provider could sell similar information,
however, there is typically an explicit claim that they won't do this,
whereas your ISP has probably buried information on what they do with your information and metadata in Terms and Conditions documents. Your VPN
provider's ISP will be able to monitor your internet activity but it will
be mixed with the activity of the VPN provider's other customers, and they won't have any of your sign up information.

I've heard some VPNs let you pay pseudo anonymously with crypto currency (albeit with a cryptographically verifiable public ledger!), to prevent
direct matching of internet activity to an identity.

<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
And you&#39;ll need to always keep in mind that a VPN is a low-level protection. It&#39;s enough for protecting yourself against spammers, script kiddies or<br>
similar but it can&#39;t keep you private in the face of any high-level threats. Don&#39;t place too much trust in VPNs.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I&#39;m not an expert, but AFAIK VPNs don&#39;t offer any particular benefit with regards to spam
or script kiddies. <br><br>A VPN will;<br>- Hide your internet activity from your ISP<br>- Make your internet activity available to your VPN provider<br>- Make your internet activity available to your VPN provider&#39;s ISP<br><br>Without a VPN, your ISP
could sell the details used to sign up for the account (eg. name, phone number, email address) along with your internet activity. With a VPN, the VPN provider could sell similar information, however, there is typically an explicit claim that they won&#39;
t do this, whereas your ISP has probably buried information on what they do with your information and metadata in Terms and Conditions documents. Your VPN provider&#39;s ISP will be able to monitor your internet activity but it will be mixed with the
activity of the VPN provider&#39;s other customers, and they won&#39;t have any of your sign up information.<br><br>I&#39;ve heard some VPNs let you pay pseudo anonymously with crypto currency (albeit with a cryptographically verifiable public ledger!),
to prevent direct matching of internet activity to an identity.  <br></div></div></div>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 2:41 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

Peter Humphrey wrote:

On Saturday, 16 July 2022 11:57:25 BST Dale wrote:

Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them. Now I can upload
videos or something.

...or run a web server!

That's way above anything I'd want to tackle. Heck, this VPN thing is a
bit confusing. I've never seen it used before so sort of lost with it.
Maybe once installed it will make sense.

That prompts the question - why do you want a VPN? (what do you think it
will do for you?)

If it's to get around geo-blocking, it's probably a good option if there's
no legal implications. If it's for something else it's probably worth
digging a bit deeper. If it's to try to avoid legal responsibility (eg. to download copyrighted content), don't do anything you're not prepared to pay
the fine / do the time for.

<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 2:41 AM Dale &lt;<a href="mailto:rdalek1967@gmail.com">rdalek1967@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px
0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Peter Humphrey wrote:<br>
&gt; On Saturday, 16 July 2022 11:57:25 BST Dale wrote:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;&gt; Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them.  Now I can upload<br>
&gt;&gt; videos or something. <br>
&gt; ...or run a web server!<br>
&gt;<br>


That&#39;s way above anything I&#39;d want to tackle.  Heck, this VPN thing is a<br>
bit confusing.  I&#39;ve never seen it used before so sort of lost with it. <br>
Maybe once installed it will make sense. <br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>That prompts the question - why do you want a VPN? (what do you think it will do for you?)<br></div><div><br></div><div>If it&#39;s to get around geo-blocking, it&#39;s
probably a good option if there&#39;s no legal implications. If it&#39;s for something else it&#39;s probably worth digging a bit deeper. If it&#39;s to try to avoid legal responsibility (eg. to download copyrighted content), don&#39;t do anything you&#
39;re not prepared to pay the fine / do the time for. <br></div></div></div>

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Dale wrote:

Howdy,

Fiber internet is right around the corner.  Some neighbors are already connected and they working their way to my area.  Once I get connected,
I also want to use a VPN but only for some programs.  Example, I want Ktorrent and a couple Firefox profiles to use VPNs but at least one
Firefox profile I want to remain outside of VPN.  I watched a few videos
but want to be sure I understand this right.  If I want software to use
a VPN, I put the IP address of the VPN into the proxy settings of the
program and that makes it use the VPN.  If I want it to not use the VPN,
I leave the settings as they are now.  Am I understanding this correctly? 

Also, the package I'm getting is 500Mbs/sec.  What speeds should I
really expect?  If memory serves me right, that is about 50MBs/sec, note
the size of the B.  By the way, that is about 50 times faster than what
I have now.  Also, up and down is the same.  Current up stream is a lot smaller.  Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them.  Now
I can upload videos or something. 

I'm looking at Surfshark and NordVPN.  Both seem to be good and at a
decent price.  Anyone used one or both of these?

Just trying to make sure I'm on the right path. 

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

P. S.  Seamonkey is still not fetching emails automatically, I'm waiting
on a upgrade to see if it gets fixed then.  If not, revive old thread
and bring out the hammer.  ;-) 

I now have fiber internet.  It was installed on Tuesday morning.  Speed
test shows it is awesome.  I downloaded a Knoppix iso file, about 4.4GBs worth, in just about 5 minutes.  It would have taken about 9 hours on
old DSL internet.  I'm perfectly happy with that.

I also ordered a router that has openvpn installed on it.  I watched
some videos and think I can set it up to keep my traffic out of public
view.  After I learned more about it, there's no reason to not use the
VPN for all traffic really.  That way I'm protected a little bit even if
a website is not secure.  May not help much but it may be enough. 

This is as big a difference as when I went from dial-up to DSL.  I can
update my OS in minutes as far as downloading goes.  Now it will be
compiling that I have to wait on.  Again.  ;-)

Now I know what some of you guys have been enjoying, and why. :-D 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

P. S.  Seamonkey still doesn't do email fetch automatically.  I may dig
out my mini sledge hammer.  :/ 

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, 4 August 2022 23:32:03 BST Dale wrote:

I also ordered a router that has openvpn installed on it. I watched
some videos and think I can set it up to keep my traffic out of public
view. After I learned more about it, there's no reason to not use the
VPN for all traffic really. That way I'm protected a little bit even if
a website is not secure.

If by "not secure website" you mean an unencrypted connection to a web server, then such an insecure website remains insecure and so does your connection to it, whether the leg from your router to the VPN concentrator is encrypted or not.

What kind of protection are you seeking - what is your threat model?

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmLsTCsACgkQseqq9sKV Zxl+WQ//ZIM1cE37Ep1Jha+HynHjLKJLElsnPb9qN6lAur4PULWmcqxRhPL5drjA XAqRi1gSn/bIK2UB5rsqrYZpQxsjBE5Lo7SsbSsT8VXdFERnt/fmjBX37DAj1xTy PMdVfwyJRb1Yn1fU0Ma9ahCnu8hfbrR00XvxI7mtEEXZDuVDuPeHJCmkQh0eFH6W HpZbjjKS1I4rnuHqlpIYc5OvJFiDkmidRaYvpB+RoHG26qthwignT6F6BtOHnp8r ujqj++gP7ozskHVvwW1j9sRJ1XBUKRjjfybvcwjtEFZeb6aj/SOXxvWL71YCh2qy 2hlGulb7ND3Y63hdYjeTPARBcGniZJfiMSk1pW74rgw0VrAILYmgol6FJev7/htr 21qaO2pFiZIOGlcn2EgRJO5Pcr+A/qObakp8uyxflTRb2zBdX9K8dDC/tXlxBwc9 5AGyDQgI4gjYZgqzavI3d4QB+Pijdq5awAc1X0Ef9RPbavrAJq2uYx4vBY1tKee0 xQMuZfH8dwFHuuMM4J94FEwKAfwtSGrfl2dtUi55HvfbhxF1pZcpWxgzcofirunt WlH6TiBlALiQlUZHJhAsvOydAENvYN0ZVapmh1jumEzAbiwzprgNShPQAmRQDl7A kNrzp/tQRZZIwd65E0fg1/ckP6Y5jRw0FB86A9l66wQ7O9Z7TEw=
=3lF1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Michael wrote:

On Thursday, 4 August 2022 23:32:03 BST Dale wrote:

I also ordered a router that has openvpn installed on it. I watched
some videos and think I can set it up to keep my traffic out of public
view. After I learned more about it, there's no reason to not use the
VPN for all traffic really. That way I'm protected a little bit even if
a website is not secure.

If by "not secure website" you mean an unencrypted connection to a web server,
then such an insecure website remains insecure and so does your connection to it, whether the leg from your router to the VPN concentrator is encrypted or not.

What kind of protection are you seeking - what is your threat model?

I'm mostly wanting it so people can't just look and see what I'm doing
or where I am, mostly my ISP.  I do a little torrenting and such too.
;-)  That said, even if I go to my bank's website which is https, it
will also go through a VPN which also encrypts the traffic.  My bank is
secure as far as I know but having more protection added can't be a bad thing. 

I'm torn between torguard and surfshark.  I'm not sure where torguard is located but surfshark is in the Netherlands I think.  Outside US
jurisdiction and from what I've read, they never give info to anyone
about their customers traffic.  I'm still researching torguard.  Maybe someone here knows where they are located???

I have a add-on for one of my Firefox profiles that adds a free VPN but
it is slow since it is free.  I've been using it for a while for some
stuff.  So far, I haven't visited my bank or anything with it tho.  It remembers my location and if it says I've moved to some other place, it
might freak out a bit.  I still have a bit to learn about VPN but some
things I'm not going into in public. 

The biggest thing, the speed of my new internet is just awesome. 
Downloading that Knoppix ISO that would normally take almost half a day
but on fiber took minutes, very few of those even, was just plain
awesome.  Used to, I waited on the internet, now it waits on me.  If I
were to upgrade to the really fast one, I'd likely fall out of my
chair.  :/ 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, 5 August 2022 21:45:25 BST Dale wrote:

Michael wrote:

What kind of protection are you seeking - what is your threat model?

I'm mostly wanting it so people can't just look and see what I'm doing
or where I am, mostly my ISP.

In this case 'people' and your ISP will see you are connecting to the remote VPN, but not what website you visit thereon.

The website you visit will not see your real IP, but the exit IP of the VPN node. This may break some websites and streaming services who only allow connections from specific jurisdictions.

I do a little torrenting and such too.
;-) That said, even if I go to my bank's website which is https, it
will also go through a VPN which also encrypts the traffic. My bank is secure as far as I know but having more protection added can't be a bad thing.

All connections to banks are encrypted end-to-end for decades now and the encryption has becoming stronger over the years.

I'm torn between torguard and surfshark. I'm not sure where torguard is located but surfshark is in the Netherlands I think. Outside US
jurisdiction and from what I've read, they never give info to anyone
about their customers traffic.

Yeah, that's what they all say - their business model depends on it. State sponsored actors are likely to know what the need to know anyway, with or without the explicit VPN providers collaboration. ;-)

I'm still researching torguard. Maybe
someone here knows where they are located???

I understand they are a US based provider in Florida:

Vpnetworks, LLC
618 E South St
Orlando, FL 32801

but they have VPN servers all over the globe. Some are virtual servers and are NOT physically located in the countries they claim. The fact it is
located in the USA it means the authorities can request client list information. VPN providers in jurisdictions like BVI, Panama, or even Switzerland might stand a better chance.

Anyway, this is a moot point. If a VPN provider protects your traffic from 'people', who protects your traffic from the ... VPN people?! LOL!

I don't use VPNs, but the interwebs are buzzing with reviews and suggestions. If torrenting is a requirement, then associated forums and mailing lists would provide advice on what works best for your use case.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmLtnBIACgkQseqq9sKV ZxmpIRAAqfhkyyF/NDP6u+m6dG03exduUglz/RGnl7naWLdH0zxk54Hr/wDT+wDu Qd9dcCAZ5pwjmUqm7LOeYqgoxQYYrZBJR22A98w9dYi+m8W5RkvOoJqcHuvf4l4L 1F1RWxAeH59LSszWYRVDKUZrR62g9L4efszAYuEcDFCQYlTIqRs23LYX17rRZjED AzEDxxXqkDGtQUkcPXvI2I5YhUNhO4WleYDaX9kYyIBv100mLEWnrgAwhey1Ve+z wZHRoZgZNhKKuLqRu5zy7MDqrV+MH5NSzii6fwdSbXblB4fDKjFeT2HbHoBKZt6P XaCsbb6sQNjNtYMRq3bt6Qb13GsZhHVic2KKBvpvIc/4EGiQ5OJs24YCLCpl0yGq g7xIEpM1UvwFvRSvnsv9QUEo/MUpiTuvdw0/4H15roWIs9s+V/NNdJ9uA9j3Uk2J DL6CAOq5AcpDG/wSy3gBgvulOymSBKIF7C6KC0UqjTp8+JPQL3fFkMZ1pIxzp61/ 037Delf3e4bO4IMIky4NERLgqvWMuD7otxMJiWI4Zf6NeqsnqIJAej452UN3FnRb PVHFjUb8/7YBu6gR+QW19ImauM1OZkq+em9PBHohmg8uMj1cAjUvZYaEme1yT3+n cfh6QdjAYWcv03VLxx5qISpA3/5z64cMwkSpyO5BIraL5fKJG94=
=0/RK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 05/08/2022 15:53, Laurence Perkins wrote:

Oh, and note that if your ISP works the same way as mine, they have a backdoor into whatever equipment they happen to have provided. So definitely put it in bridge mode or whatever and use your own gear if you don't want them spying on the doings of

your internal network. One of the local ISPs here even calls it a "feature" and will ping the mobile app they require you to install to use their service every time they detect "suspicious" traffic on your internal net...

What do they do if you don't know how to use a mobile? (Yes that IS a
serious question - I provide tech support to family like that :-)

Cheers,
Wol

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 7/16/22 10:41, Dale wrote:

Peter Humphrey wrote:

On Saturday, 16 July 2022 11:57:25 BST Dale wrote:

Basically, I can upload files as fast as I download them. Now I can upload >>> videos or something.

...or run a web server!

That's way above anything I'd want to tackle.  Heck, this VPN thing is a
bit confusing.  I've never seen it used before so sort of lost with it. Maybe once installed it will make sense.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Check out this post I made some time ago: https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-8028944.html#8028944

It might give you better understanding what it does, and how it is implemented.

OpenVPN is just encrypted communication between two networks over public internet (your ISP can not snoop on what you are doing).

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 00:05:20 BST Wol wrote:

On 05/08/2022 15:53, Laurence Perkins wrote:

Oh, and note that if your ISP works the same way as mine, they have a backdoor into whatever equipment they happen to have provided. So definitely put it in bridge mode or whatever and use your own gear if you don't want them spying on the doings of your internal network. One of
the local ISPs here even calls it a "feature" and will ping the mobile
app they require you to install to use their service every time they
detect "suspicious" traffic on your internal net...

What do they do if you don't know how to use a mobile? (Yes that IS a
serious question - I provide tech support to family like that :-)

...or if you use your own equipment?

--
Regards,
Peter.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Michael wrote:

On Friday, 5 August 2022 21:45:25 BST Dale wrote:

Michael wrote:

What kind of protection are you seeking - what is your threat model?

I'm mostly wanting it so people can't just look and see what I'm doing
or where I am, mostly my ISP.

In this case 'people' and your ISP will see you are connecting to the remote VPN, but not what website you visit thereon.

The website you visit will not see your real IP, but the exit IP of the VPN node. This may break some websites and streaming services who only allow connections from specific jurisdictions.

That may be the case but if it is a problem I run into, I can adjust
settings if needed.  

I do a little torrenting and such too.
;-) That said, even if I go to my bank's website which is https, it
will also go through a VPN which also encrypts the traffic. My bank is
secure as far as I know but having more protection added can't be a bad
thing.

All connections to banks are encrypted end-to-end for decades now and the encryption has becoming stronger over the years.

That is likely true.  I still remember Snowden tho.  We don't know what backdoors are in use even for bank encryption.  Thing is, open source
tools are harder to fall into that trap since everyone can see what the
code is.  If a backdoor is forced in, it will be known to a lot of
people and then that tool won't be used.  It's sort of funny in a way,
they more Govts and others try to restrict things, the more tools there
is to get around it.  From what I've read, most VPNs use open source
tools.  Most even use the current best and would upgrade if needed. 
That gives me some extra protection in the event my bank or any other
website falls behind on updating theirs. 

Basically, I don't trust Govt with much of anything.  If they say they
don't do something bad, you can pretty much bet they are doing exactly
that or even worse. 

I'm torn between torguard and surfshark. I'm not sure where torguard is
located but surfshark is in the Netherlands I think. Outside US
jurisdiction and from what I've read, they never give info to anyone
about their customers traffic.

Yeah, that's what they all say - their business model depends on it. State sponsored actors are likely to know what the need to know anyway, with or without the explicit VPN providers collaboration. ;-)

May be the case but I plan to try anyway.  At least it won't be easy for them. 

I'm still researching torguard. Maybe
someone here knows where they are located???

I understand they are a US based provider in Florida:

Vpnetworks, LLC
618 E South St
Orlando, FL 32801

but they have VPN servers all over the globe. Some are virtual servers and are NOT physically located in the countries they claim. The fact it is located in the USA it means the authorities can request client list information. VPN providers in jurisdictions like BVI, Panama, or even Switzerland might stand a better chance.

Anyway, this is a moot point. If a VPN provider protects your traffic from 'people', who protects your traffic from the ... VPN people?! LOL!

I don't use VPNs, but the interwebs are buzzing with reviews and suggestions. If torrenting is a requirement, then associated forums and mailing lists would
provide advice on what works best for your use case.

Well, that settles that then.  I guess it will be Surfshark.  Pretty
sure it is in the Netherlands but may be wrong on country.  I just
recall it being outside US jurisdiction.  I also read they have been
audited by independent people to ensure they have no logs even if asked. 

Thanks for all the info.  Yours to Tastytea. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

P. S.  Anyone need some used AT&T DSL modems?  I got a few. Some have
been updated with heat sinks on the chips which makes them run cooler. 
I got several Westel black ones and a couple smaller gray Motorola
ones.  I also have one that is a AT&T marked one.  They need a home. 
;-)  May start a new thread if no one replies here.  Kinda buried in
this thread.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 07:07:26 BST Dale wrote:

Michael wrote:

All connections to banks are encrypted end-to-end for decades now and the encryption has becoming stronger over the years.

That is likely true. I still remember Snowden tho. We don't know what backdoors are in use even for bank encryption.

It's safer to assume state actors have full access to bank information. The hope is bad guys don't get access too! ;-)

Thing is, open source
tools are harder to fall into that trap since everyone can see what the
code is. If a backdoor is forced in, it will be known to a lot of
people and then that tool won't be used. It's sort of funny in a way,
they more Govts and others try to restrict things, the more tools there
is to get around it. From what I've read, most VPNs use open source
tools. Most even use the current best and would upgrade if needed.
That gives me some extra protection in the event my bank or any other
website falls behind on updating theirs.

A VPN gives no end-to-end protection whatsoever in this scenario. All you get is protection in the network connection between your PC and the VPN server. From the VPN server onward to your bank, the connection will be no more protected than whatever encryption protocol the bank offers. Only a VPN
server offered by your bank for connections to their network would afford additional protection in this scenario.

Basically, I don't trust Govt with much of anything. If they say they
don't do something bad, you can pretty much bet they are doing exactly
that or even worse.

Heh! After the Snowden revelations any such suspicions could be taken as a certainty.


[snip ...]

Well, that settles that then. I guess it will be Surfshark. Pretty
sure it is in the Netherlands but may be wrong on country. I just
recall it being outside US jurisdiction. I also read they have been
audited by independent people to ensure they have no logs even if asked.

Surfshark gets good reviews and it offers the wireguard protocol with the ChaCha20 cipher for better encryption and performance. However, the Netherlands is part of the EU and 14 eyes, so I would think similar state powers exist to access your private communications and the ISPs would have no way of refusing and staying in business. Surfshark offers a warrant canary, but it looks more like a marketing statement to me when you compare it to something like the Qubes digitally signed canaries.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmLuJwcACgkQseqq9sKV ZxmLGA/+JbrGjN1bGgIhZbdYe13W89H8SXGPJHlP5EiDh+PKTJYdn+R6e1D70f+X 7JtaTYpPf7bgkA+jJ9rp+hX0uHalcYlbdWrvhkwChrnilXJ6cag37yn8Vpflj3Ss +DwY9KMxR26++q7s8em77eE/BqEFxTYDNoHamiyhrb7Ck/efLN45voBjVPCQ2Ayj drSpkU+ePIbCHDE4F9Jbyx3hxxi0gS45Uoxka5RFZyYSXg5y70uSI3ITTcTEu8C4 Bf4Ru4fw05TquRHVc4gTJGMpU+mDQBs8oYmbT/KX1kkFkTDCAdDaXteIXaTnAIww lcVTnHPoOvtCR3zbo9D0oDqiQja4sUE+lclU3391yO1i1qrr/YCV4HLWN/g/LRTr 5gQMVjXUr+Ll9N+7k2vVUMdqgkiG2/rJRMdB5rlkgcmP7NfQLwj9ZkPw8m0Xr8vj vO9//AC6a1w0IaLxa0PL7oqlpyETl43HFrQ4yufK2P6RblJu3ImzK5mzXgoEtA83 0wqX3/76gajNowYCBJ82sPR3IW3zOYY410KoEyTCNXBH/XTvUOAXnxLpCHsCV2SP Blfe+FdQCOim9PvKXsUBwzCnlelLwyUjvdTVvCBkkNbBOAUyJ2e7Fkju/rkDOGOh Aen/f6RZJwSlSDCbPdJaEIT/kPXVvkmBh3QOgUbD/Kq4xtlFxRs=
=0LIE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Dale wrote:

Michael wrote:

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 07:07:26 BST Dale wrote:

Well, that settles that then. I guess it will be Surfshark. Pretty
sure it is in the Netherlands but may be wrong on country. I just
recall it being outside US jurisdiction. I also read they have been
audited by independent people to ensure they have no logs even if asked.

Surfshark gets good reviews and it offers the wireguard protocol with the
ChaCha20 cipher for better encryption and performance. However, the
Netherlands is part of the EU and 14 eyes, so I would think similar state
powers exist to access your private communications and the ISPs would have no
way of refusing and staying in business. Surfshark offers a warrant canary, >> but it looks more like a marketing statement to me when you compare it to
something like the Qubes digitally signed canaries.

I forgot about the 14 eyes thing.  Do you know of one outside that that
is good?  The bad thing about most, they are pricey if done by the month
for testing.  You only get a good deal if you subscribe for a year or
even two years.  I don't want to subscribe and then find out it is a bad one. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

I did a quick google search and Surfshark is based in British Virgin
Islands and is outside the eyes countries.  I was thinking it was
Netherlands but wasn't sure.  When I searched for VPN outside 14 eyes
country, Surfshark is highly rated.  Depending on the site, it's in the
top few each time. 

https://earthweb.com/vpn-outside-14-eyes/

https://www.privateproxyguide.com/best-vpn-outside-14-eyes/

Unless there is some good reason to avoid, still thinking of using it. 

Dale 

:-)  :-) 

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Michael wrote:

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 07:07:26 BST Dale wrote:

Well, that settles that then. I guess it will be Surfshark. Pretty
sure it is in the Netherlands but may be wrong on country. I just
recall it being outside US jurisdiction. I also read they have been
audited by independent people to ensure they have no logs even if asked.

Surfshark gets good reviews and it offers the wireguard protocol with the ChaCha20 cipher for better encryption and performance. However, the Netherlands is part of the EU and 14 eyes, so I would think similar state powers exist to access your private communications and the ISPs would have no way of refusing and staying in business. Surfshark offers a warrant canary, but it looks more like a marketing statement to me when you compare it to something like the Qubes digitally signed canaries.

I forgot about the 14 eyes thing.  Do you know of one outside that that
is good?  The bad thing about most, they are pricey if done by the month
for testing.  You only get a good deal if you subscribe for a year or
even two years.  I don't want to subscribe and then find out it is a bad one. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, Jul 16, 2022 at 6:57 AM Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

I also want to use a VPN but only for some programs. Example, I want Ktorrent and a couple Firefox profiles to use VPNs but at least one
Firefox profile I want to remain outside of VPN.

I can't keep up with which VPNs are more or less scummy at any moment
in time, but I will comment on this bit and on the concept in general.

Controlling which HOSTS use a VPN is pretty straightforward via the
routing tables. If you have a decent DHCP server and can issue
routers to individual hosts you can do it that way (most consumer
routers probably won't support this with their built-in DHCP).

Controlling it at the software level is a real PITA. On an OS like
Windows I don't think it is even possible unless via SOCKS or
whatever. On Linux you can do it with iproute2 and often netfilter is
needed as well. Look up policy-based routing, and be prepared to do
some studying. I'll tell you right now you probably don't want to do
it this way. I think for outbound-only connections it isn't as hard
to do it at a uid level, so if you run software under different uids
that would make it easier. If you want to handle inbound connections
on servers and have the replies not go out over the normal
destination-based route then you need to mark the connections using
netfilter and then set a policy routing for the replies, otherwise
your reply traffic will go out over the wrong router and have the
wrong IP and the other end won't associate it with the connection. I
imagine you run into the same problems with any kind of use of NAT for
inbound forwarded traffic in a multi-homed situation.

Controlling routes by container is also a potential issue. If you're
using a container technology that uses virtual interfaces that get
their own IPs/routing/etc then it is easy - same as host-level
routing. If you're using something like Docker/k8s where it wants all
the outbound traffic to just go out from the host then it can be a
pain. I think they can do macvlan but I think that has its own
issues. That is actually something I'm trying to figure out for
myself.

Ok, topic change: the threat model. As others have pointed out, the
VPN changes WHO can see your traffic, and that's mainly it. I think
this is still a useful consideration, because in many places your ISP
is chosen by where you live, but with a VPN provider you can choose
anyone you want. The ISP has no reason to earn your trust because
you're a captive audience, while a VPN provider who gets outed for
leaking private info basically is out of business. So I think there
is a benefit. However, you're going to be reducing your risk of being
traced by private companies here, like advertisers, intellectual
property enforcement companies, and so on. If you're worried about
the NSA or some other state-level actor then you need to do a LOT more
to evade them. I just assume the NSA has root on all my hosts
already, and I wish that they'd at least offer to sell backups of my
systems back to me so that I didn't need to keep my own... :)

--
Rich

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 12:08:30 BST Dale wrote:

Dale wrote:

Michael wrote:

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 07:07:26 BST Dale wrote:

Well, that settles that then. I guess it will be Surfshark. Pretty
sure it is in the Netherlands but may be wrong on country. I just
recall it being outside US jurisdiction. I also read they have been
audited by independent people to ensure they have no logs even if asked. >>

Surfshark gets good reviews and it offers the wireguard protocol with the >> ChaCha20 cipher for better encryption and performance. However, the
Netherlands is part of the EU and 14 eyes, so I would think similar state >> powers exist to access your private communications and the ISPs would
have no way of refusing and staying in business. Surfshark offers a
warrant canary, but it looks more like a marketing statement to me when
you compare it to something like the Qubes digitally signed canaries.

I forgot about the 14 eyes thing. Do you know of one outside that that
is good? The bad thing about most, they are pricey if done by the month for testing. You only get a good deal if you subscribe for a year or
even two years. I don't want to subscribe and then find out it is a bad one.

Dale

:-) :-)

I did a quick google search and Surfshark is based in British Virgin
Islands and is outside the eyes countries. I was thinking it was
Netherlands but wasn't sure.

You were thinking correctly at the start. Surfshark is located in the Netherlands since 2018 and has been bought out by Nord Security, who owns NordVPN.

When I searched for VPN outside 14 eyes
country, Surfshark is highly rated. Depending on the site, it's in the
top few each time.

https://earthweb.com/vpn-outside-14-eyes/

https://www.privateproxyguide.com/best-vpn-outside-14-eyes/

Unless there is some good reason to avoid, still thinking of using it.

The more you try to escape the 14 eyes Big Brother, the closer you may fall into the hands of various authoritarian regimes. LOL! Even VPNs like NordVPN which operates within the jurisdiction of Panama (let's not forget it is Langley's doorstep), it also has offices in the UK, Netherlands and Lithuania. I wonder why . . .

Total privacy on the Internet is improbable. If your only concern is to
retain your privacy from your ISP with regards to your Internet connections, then most/any VPN service will offer this benefit by obfuscating your IP address. Your browsing patterns, browser User Agent, addons and umpteen other OS and application fingerprints won't be obfuscated beyond the VPN server. Therefore your identity can only be protected so much and no more.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmLuYdIACgkQseqq9sKV ZxkKkRAAzjOXkYxqIcQpNZb1+Y9vR0/tRaXGZM0W8FY8wjJsPBB4c2nA5cLbQgY+ PKye7F8tuR89e8oyLVvXwRPlwcpK6yZtAKt1QGBABxditrZo/kG1/QCHylkk4A6q k7MSv8fzFj1GIZmtbE5OngHM06E81C3oSAhmJ2r98aG2mwqfChF/cnZ+ASGhVurB 5NqesF7UJmlL4Y/SOn7RKcXuTz6kSDDy1f4zxQrCD8p4OsE6uWsSt2+9z6buSjJa W6NfSG0QUxeyAJjOWg4hOHG0GMFfv6xpQnnmEtH2XolJSizuvc297cMtkxuTD4KD m78pruGb8AmHpbIccAsUJuikoQvm8eUVt8zUP1uzuuly13EF0jrortlGay3IU9ir GoNf43izv42dDN0u1z1+tmB8YxXrBL7wPqJGPJ4AR49OEEQegXlyGM0s8Bi5ROUy llhKG0lPu1eKoN5WAh1wqHChygR1KqbliYrb1KNEQ7JFgirMf04w9VVSKo+Zo0Yu 55qlzJUoKEq/adnGYGCIrKjdupOc/dOPrRPcacVta1EIMTf3jMLlKrHSJPYDHEfY fHQAP0U19p520qwe8c3ipEeuqjKfnCZL7UCVlPkkZEFDMH1CAttyX4snRT/JsaHX xo+CepiE+a5a6+8yfJDDt0QwBLuNI6NN+Dk08D4KqTXBlf1fynU=
=5E38
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 12:08:30 BST Dale wrote:

I did a quick google search and Surfshark is based in British Virgin
Islands and is outside the eyes countries.

According to [1], the BVI is "considered partners or affiliates of the fourteen eyes alliance."

1. https://www.securitymadesimple.org/cybersecurity-blog/fourteen-eyes-surveillance-explained

--
Regards,
Peter.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 6/8/22 20:42, Michael wrote:

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 12:08:30 BST Dale wrote:
...

The more you try to escape the 14 eyes Big Brother, the closer you may fall into the hands of various authoritarian regimes. LOL! Even VPNs like NordVPN
which operates within the jurisdiction of Panama (let's not forget it is Langley's doorstep), it also has offices in the UK, Netherlands and Lithuania.
I wonder why . . .

Total privacy on the Internet is improbable. If your only concern is to retain your privacy from your ISP with regards to your Internet connections, then most/any VPN service will offer this benefit by obfuscating your IP address. Your browsing patterns, browser User Agent, addons and umpteen other
OS and application fingerprints won't be obfuscated beyond the VPN server. Therefore your identity can only be protected so much and no more.

Also, leakage is almost inevitable ... DNS, content distribution
networks, browser fingerprinting, timezones, paying online with a US
credit card, US delivery address and just simple mis-configuration
exposing you to risk etc.  My impression as a long time openvpn user is
that TOR and the TOR browser might be the closest to secure for your
purposes? Also, keep in mind that things like online shopping will cost
you more overseas because if you are successful in hiding you are in the
US you will get the international surcharges, or in some cases ordering
IT stuff from the US you have to fill out export clearances (once even
for sparkfun hobby stuff!) :) ... then if you pay with a US card and/or
have a US delivery address they have got you anyway - in fact being in
Oz I gave it up as being no gain, too much pain to use a VPN try and get cheaper US shopping. I found myself having to maintain two totally
independent systems with one in a locked down VPN with US settings with
all traffic actively blocked from the local network, and use US shipping
and packaging firms that offered facilities to buy on my behalf.  That
is much harder than you think - trusting the end points is only one
small part of the problem you are trying to solve and from the Gov
monitoring point of view almost certainly a waste of time anyway as they
have massive resources. The best you can hope for with openvpn is SSL
point to point level security.  Just use HTTPS, a good browser and be
part of the crowd - if you are trawling suspect/socially compromising
websites you do not want anyone to see you going to, no matter what you
do there will always be a risk and as a VPN user you are a more likely
target for a closer look anyway.  I am sure the bigger online VPN
providers would be monitored closely - at least TOR is likely to help
more than a plain VPN.

BillK

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, 7 August 2022 07:06:55 BST William Kenworthy wrote:

On 6/8/22 20:42, Michael wrote:

On Saturday, 6 August 2022 12:08:30 BST Dale wrote:
...

The more you try to escape the 14 eyes Big Brother, the closer you may
fall
into the hands of various authoritarian regimes. LOL! Even VPNs like NordVPN which operates within the jurisdiction of Panama (let's not
forget it is Langley's doorstep), it also has offices in the UK, Netherlands and Lithuania. I wonder why . . .

Total privacy on the Internet is improbable. If your only concern is to retain your privacy from your ISP with regards to your Internet connections, then most/any VPN service will offer this benefit by obfuscating your IP address. Your browsing patterns, browser User Agent, addons and umpteen other OS and application fingerprints won't be obfuscated beyond the VPN server. Therefore your identity can only be protected so much and no more.

Also, leakage is almost inevitable ... DNS, content distribution
networks, browser fingerprinting, timezones, paying online with a US
credit card, US delivery address and just simple mis-configuration
exposing you to risk etc. My impression as a long time openvpn user is
that TOR and the TOR browser might be the closest to secure for your purposes? Also, keep in mind that things like online shopping will cost
you more overseas because if you are successful in hiding you are in the
US you will get the international surcharges, or in some cases ordering
IT stuff from the US you have to fill out export clearances (once even
for sparkfun hobby stuff!) :) ... then if you pay with a US card and/or
have a US delivery address they have got you anyway - in fact being in
Oz I gave it up as being no gain, too much pain to use a VPN try and get cheaper US shopping. I found myself having to maintain two totally independent systems with one in a locked down VPN with US settings with
all traffic actively blocked from the local network, and use US shipping
and packaging firms that offered facilities to buy on my behalf. That
is much harder than you think - trusting the end points is only one
small part of the problem you are trying to solve and from the Gov
monitoring point of view almost certainly a waste of time anyway as they
have massive resources. The best you can hope for with openvpn is SSL
point to point level security. Just use HTTPS, a good browser and be
part of the crowd - if you are trawling suspect/socially compromising websites you do not want anyone to see you going to, no matter what you
do there will always be a risk and as a VPN user you are a more likely
target for a closer look anyway. I am sure the bigger online VPN
providers would be monitored closely - at least TOR is likely to help
more than a plain VPN.

BillK

TBH I don't think even TOR is to be trusted 100%. There must be 100s if not 1000s of honeypot TOR servers set up with the purpose of harvesting comms and associating entry and exit patterns as part of regular internet surveillance work.

The best a well configured VPN tunnel can offer is a secure connection between client and VPN server, which is handy if you are out and about using untrusted and insecure WiFi hotspots. In such a case, having configured your home/office router as a VPN server for free will allow you to use your client device as a roadwarrior, which should be just as effective as using some remote VPN service.

The only other reason for using a VPN service is to present a different geolocation for the purpose of overcoming country-specific website restrictions. In this case a VPN service works effectively as a proxy server in changing your IP address.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmLv3BAACgkQseqq9sKV ZxlWJRAA4p9NV6Ue9xQyopKd5v5SuQofALWAoVgP1U0uqFE/ucLUo6vdqm9/ERDL SbM7edcsbT2Uj8vJWDz8veTDp5Qz0GudyNUEgOVKRRmVqyGVXgopINmkLpJ2Wfg2 Swqry3TW1v/yrtlqpM4ZHoOqC6aXdggwgRjfba+qp6+M4hoGpZBpzfhiAukPg2IW wVkJyUlUeWy1WSnYMxq1ARNs0qiEerySa1hSk9evc9NrbBeg0BsPuGyM1YpwlEdX Dp+twnp5ycs7B9u64slvfL6h4C7OkloYFV3PJ4yI25y7eonMfEKDDWlK6GLrY9q8 xctX5XqvVj83qyFjVMvV5zZch9s2CwZqO8rfQ3oYlNeMSX1TY4u1tN1l5KQJ2FrV Y5Av/A9uKP8xsicbmQzgGo4z/OnFjLKmcEWmiCQJNWrImDu8QTLJ+unJFRDRe8zW C3wq2QrsKvBGK0FJU2/cD4G79RjbrLfsPq1+Sudi16LFBKi3+jxLwCwSBcrrnnpk F0uCtLnMh3BOpHDHGDzGm28YRbQc9RYer4vSfa+wz69x9qe+waooyw5lRuOQIP6z UrrUnA2Z0eZr35L700kDcDdye9vuO+D9LzbJB2CduhZ+VAjUmUfDYFEsy0tXBla3 Q8O1gBj4Z7igRTR9xCluQKNJIt77mdJbvtEYVOXsy/tECZC/pdM=
=WYsj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sun, Aug 7, 2022 at 11:36 AM Michael <confabulate@kintzios.com> wrote:

The best a well configured VPN tunnel can offer is a secure connection between
client and VPN server, which is handy if you are out and about using untrusted
and insecure WiFi hotspots.

The only other reason for using a VPN service is to present a different geolocation for the purpose of overcoming country-specific website restrictions.

I think ONLY is a bit strong here. A VPN effectively makes it
impossible for your ISP to know who you're talking to, and it obscures
your IP from hosts you are connecting to.

Sure, there are ways to defeat this, but most of them are only
applicable for state-level actors, and the methods available to
ordinary companies can only identify at best a unique browser profile,
which only lets them correlate traffic with those they share info with
to the degree that you use a single browser profile across those
platforms. For non-web traffic there are generally fewer attacks
available. Many of the attacks that are often cited like DNS-based
attacks are not that difficult to prevent (eg by ensuring your DNS
traffic goes out over the VPN).

If there are sites you browse using a different browser profile
(ideally on a VM/etc), and you never use that browser profile for
ecommerce or activity associated with your normal social media
accounts, then it is unlikely that those sites will actually be able
to identify you.

Really the biggest pain with the VPNs is the number of websites that
actively try to block connections from them or flood you with
CAPTCHAs. Many more mainstream social media sites/etc also
effectively require association with a mobile phone number, or trigger
this behavior if they don't like your IP address. Obviously VPNs can
be abused to attack hosts or evade bans and generally cause trouble,
which is a frustration for those who simply don't want companies to
know who you are.

Bottom line is that just because the NSA can track your connections
doesn't mean that every random webserver on the planet can do so. The
few government agencies that are likely to be that well-connected are
also very interested in keeping the extent of their capabilities
hidden from each other, and so when they intercept your data they're
going to guard it even more carefully than you would. A solution
doesn't need to be able to defeat the NSA to be useful.

--
Rich

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sunday, 7 August 2022 19:27:42 BST Rich Freeman wrote:

On Sun, Aug 7, 2022 at 11:36 AM Michael <confabulate@kintzios.com> wrote:

The best a well configured VPN tunnel can offer is a secure connection between client and VPN server, which is handy if you are out and about using untrusted and insecure WiFi hotspots.

The only other reason for using a VPN service is to present a different geolocation for the purpose of overcoming country-specific website restrictions.

I think ONLY is a bit strong here. A VPN effectively makes it
impossible for your ISP to know who you're talking to, and it obscures
your IP from hosts you are connecting to.

Yes, fair point. I was thinking why would you go to such an effort just to obscure your comms from your ISP. I'm not saying there aren't use cases supporting this endeavor. I was thinking more about political activists operating under oppressive regimes where state-level surveillance would be the threat model. In this case I would think state actors wouldn't rely on ISPs alone to share such information, although ISP's data would be tapped into for good measure.

Sure, there are ways to defeat this, but most of them are only
applicable for state-level actors, and the methods available to
ordinary companies can only identify at best a unique browser profile,
which only lets them correlate traffic with those they share info with
to the degree that you use a single browser profile across those
platforms. For non-web traffic there are generally fewer attacks
available. Many of the attacks that are often cited like DNS-based
attacks are not that difficult to prevent (eg by ensuring your DNS
traffic goes out over the VPN).

Yes, careful VPN implementations would guard against DNS leaks and the like.

If there are sites you browse using a different browser profile
(ideally on a VM/etc), and you never use that browser profile for
ecommerce or activity associated with your normal social media
accounts, then it is unlikely that those sites will actually be able
to identify you.

Really the biggest pain with the VPNs is the number of websites that
actively try to block connections from them or flood you with
CAPTCHAs. Many more mainstream social media sites/etc also
effectively require association with a mobile phone number, or trigger
this behavior if they don't like your IP address. Obviously VPNs can
be abused to attack hosts or evade bans and generally cause trouble,
which is a frustration for those who simply don't want companies to
know who you are.

Bottom line is that just because the NSA can track your connections
doesn't mean that every random webserver on the planet can do so. The
few government agencies that are likely to be that well-connected are
also very interested in keeping the extent of their capabilities
hidden from each other, and so when they intercept your data they're
going to guard it even more carefully than you would.

I would sincerely hope so. Can't vouch their contractors and subcontractors would do the same in all cases though.

A solution doesn't need to be able to defeat the NSA to be useful.

ACK. It boils down to use cases and requirements. I suppose people who seek to avoid state surveillance would probably use multilayered encryption and steganography, or better stay off the Internet all together? ;-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmLwEuMACgkQseqq9sKV ZxmcsBAA4QfDDKJuY7maLJaCeVqsT1Wo7UpWf6A02ZLhLBB9c3vbYR5Quev5wntI rhOHfhZhifHAO7kA1vnlbipfNuYr6lEArDm5bLVtokF7VzbRYKKgKu0zOIFJge5z f9vbUbky29paokIK+3lFl0yE2VfhFawjKurQtMeuwfetlThUbFB34BQ/1upYSoNV GJCc47MVf3qKvI3MYl7TJHFUMorx6IqGF84iSfP5hYVEgzeB0+LONiKII7d2l0/7 x3y5e6hyEXDlCJRdmaKHhalsj/TGuvsqfUcAtisTk8qQi6I8SC2pPLvbn7Id41wY aUYxkyDxI0PS6CTXVli9ZIG1L3/B+RB6CuYqcCifcpLGqllINsCVcimGo3VhaHBp ORzfb3qycpyQRP1q5zkkCzdKS3nHJolTE2ZKN90Hgijb5IgANqNWyYiuy00EsfWk e0SZGrWhrOkWuYF5mfC+Dj/eb3oEFdyzhKoYEo75ghBlYIBdfNhErakIS6BHw5ZX Ew+xIkOj2oY7CBYjYfsk5546gr1nCnf/XDbqBkKI3dHEUhSKC9QZGufG1xnM/oao 6IFdfEXTuHztz6eFxWpefXFoN4f+kVpafALWKGiFRcX23Go4llxd2GDdKiM/gOrh K7j2TYOuuwTt131tmjTZn0wN8sGM0bSiS1tpPaSHJUvBWpPSE0g=
=oW7y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Monday, 8 August 2022 17:25:08 BST Laurence Perkins wrote:

I would strongly recommend getting your own equipment with most ISPs since the rental price on their equipment will buy a new modem yearly.

Now, that said, the other ISP in the area also has a backdoor, and they try to connect to it any time they're running diagnostics, and if the
connection fails then they reset the circuit. So your choice is use one of their sanctioned models and leave the backdoor alone or else have sporadic dropouts.

Life isn't like that in the UK - at least, I hope not. I'm not aware of any such behaviour by my ISP.

--
Regards,
Peter.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tue, 09 Aug 2022 00:04:53 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

So government level actors spying on your banking just go to the
bank. And they've been getting more nosey in recent years. Last I
heard, any transaction over $600 gets automatically reported to them,
and they keep talking about lowering that threshold.

Thank goodness I don't live in the good ol' US of A. The land of the
free? Hm...

We still have the protections introduced by the EU. Let's hope the
government aren't about to tear them up... oh, they are.


--
Neil Bothwick

All things in moderation, ESPECIALLY moderation.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEE8k9T/rX16EJxEKG692eFu0QSMJgFAmLxnakACgkQ92eFu0QS MJjnHBAAnXGym6BPLHLCzEY+V+PDB6LoQqnA1iluZoGSjWQCg4L6sTR4Mp0Wbc1W vbrf0gjgTObkcUKD7bBO9Tz+CtLs9F5AOSHH7bt6pkXTwhTqFb3xGwdMvUAhV1MN Cy92l8khAAq5exkgKcrlduYfVEA+UscXsBPF2PUqhJ0IgPb0kpTBXj3R8aaMW0Hr BOESb0dCXPWTZ3sG8KESJ8Jeuy19u84nB+21mFGAKYZmhEMz0PfJ35wG90ADNjgw c08vRp0lLLRkRtgRjSGRqJ5iw+wEvvxcGnume90UTC1A04rDZBQHHEoDxbYozrku g79rnzmGR5VYsUHTLB9HDlhoMU6YpYOaGgDuupdNr8vheHEqUWdhMWAXFKEl7sTu 4knRMRYs7bcud6sK39uZp5vKH0yFEU9WgNxhvbsVJRIgK0TNYp1f3F6d+PAqraHw NYITAyoF34X3zh6vyobu7comBRwERc8M+mxpVrf9low50v4x3kMXh+QrhGEfAfsJ ajjZnmNB3I+aaqCBQYwB2br50zz4XSar/4lwR/0yvzpxp2S5KoHaEYDfd506Lgm+ 0F3KtNmEoxnkp+Pwh08e7KxrAajK1dx3yQuWDwHr+i6wnnvrGKaDjQe0KHWl7oCY RypHeIBkXtXKDm8qWgiZYbnFV6QVNQhJ1SFUyY3Bj075+U678ic=
=lkd3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, 9 August 2022 00:35:05 BST Neil Bothwick wrote:

On Tue, 09 Aug 2022 00:04:53 +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:

So government level actors spying on your banking just go to the
bank. And they've been getting more nosey in recent years. Last I heard, any transaction over $600 gets automatically reported to them,
and they keep talking about lowering that threshold.

Thank goodness I don't live in the good ol' US of A. The land of the
free? Hm...

We still have the protections introduced by the EU. Let's hope the
government aren't about to tear them up... oh, they are.

My understanding is the UK (and EU) are all the same if not worse in this respect. Law stipulated protections on data privacy mostly apply to private companies, but do not exclude access to your data by governments. As far as I recall there's not even a need to seek approval by a judge to do so anymore, although there will be some rudimentary 'supervision' of operatives by more senior ... operatives. Ha!

It's probably safer to assume Internet and privacy are effectively quite orthogonal.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEXqhvaVh2ERicA8Ceseqq9sKVZxkFAmLyH+UACgkQseqq9sKV Zxm84g//cy983VNXE7pDkh/twPfiG7A+yF187h2puNZpRKiW2Yh+QJcFHeEJHJpy d7GFauZdSslsTvYlCgFxurt0GznCmK005ryNgP8nzEL+QfzYixWV4YD00HbRo3PE LVT1qXmx1aWpX/egEEzOE8lwE+urxzIBRkE3DyJVtazATuIkR9c7nX2btbcA6woz FzhSI3rO8axwRjds+j8Ow1PGFQibWoaLrXftJDTn52EaZIeaRpDXu+ZEv2pfgvzl t2NfYenzDxmQaNl52lz7PsGxTCBGmTSxV5EB2Ofh4jYIOceGw8kO5K45tvj7J5gl tuPJ/1JJiY0qJ1t0kDpMLrzzLrq3onWh1GQpkVRFQHzisRKZ2RLOD8RaDBwoUw8u TMns4/vHfXGpuEUxWQiRNi+RESOi8+01ojdZ2uh5L2+JJWkq4jiCXe7ZFdhEtNxm 8NFXkW3MXtMupyd6DSdRJtizCCpvnWAOzwNqCEMxjs6MbsIrU+cW+VBlLX6ZTVUk t2wJkzX4kaDZsAX8d9hVz1wjEsv21jgST4HeLSqPZpmY9QxcIl63MobHRwL7JG/6 UPUOxyGHfndmYIMDYmKZygVW9n3EqE0gYbcsZ01VIOpFuU7dVBSF25mBk8ERsqAY Owm7Us2GdeqkX6nO9bVF/qb2vRtSUwglIxWlelhGPay5DZ4ie3A=
=ff/z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Tuesday, 9 August 2022 17:06:13 BST Laurence Perkins wrote:

I've heard a few, similar stories from your side of the pond. So far as I can tell it's a matter of incompetence, not maliciousness.

The word you want is 'malice'.

--
Regards,
Peter.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)