Bit of an uphill fight with captchas everywhere. Do people here conduct all online activity over VPN whenever possible? Only for the sensitive stuff? Or perhaps the inverse because the bank already knows you? Maybe when travelling or getting around region blocking? Something else?
The one provided by my work aside, I realized that I don't have any consistent rules around using VPN. Except sometimes, you know, when downloading ISO's for my favorite distos.
88 Comments
artyom@piefed.social · 62 pts · 2d
Pretty much always. If someone blocks my VPN, I just don't go there or don't use that. Sucks but it is what it is. I'm just not willing to enter your site bareback.
oeuf@slrpnk.net · 23 pts · 2d
Mine is on pretty much all the time. Capchas are indeed annoying, but I'm choosing to see that as something which helps me to be more intentional about my use of the internet.
My bank and government portal don't seem to care about it, even if my traffic is coming from a random country on the other side of the world because I've forgotten to route through one of my VPN's domestic servers. Online freelancing platforms, on the other hand, have instantly banned my accounts, and I've had problems with corporate social media (which I try and use for my business).
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz · 1 pts · 2d
Whats this with vpns using capatchas?
My client device having the right encryption key is the authenticator for me.
some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Most sites can tell if you're using a VPN. It depends on the site, but this can cause sites to treat your visit as suspicious and throw up their defenses. This includes use of CAPTCHA. Some sites (e.g. Reddit) don't work at all if your traffic exits from a known VPN.
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz · 17 pts · 2d
somegeek@programming.dev · 3 pts · 2d
going around government censorship, being safer from being tracked
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 1d
I get the idea but all of it depends on placing your trust in some company who’s entire business model is to sell you privacy.
If you live in an area with such heavy censorship then can you trust the business that is legally allowed to advertise and sell to you?
I personally think such company is way more likely to sell my data on the dark web then the government has resources to investigate what web domains i have visited.
somegeek@programming.dev · 2 pts · 1d
They aren't legally allowed to advertised and sell. Having them installed and selling them is a crime. (China, Iran, many other countries)
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz · 2 pts · 1d
It is a valid use case. But thats not my usecase by far, which is what was asked.
My comment is slightly directed at people i know irl that are not very technological and believe that surfing the web is inherently not safe, but completely safe one you pay to connect to name_tm.
My apologies if it felt condescending for people who have good reason to tunnel outside there local jurisdiction.
remotedev@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 1d
Do you know of a guide for a setup like this?
webghost0101@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 1d
I have a router with opnsense which has q plugin for wireguard making things quite easy for me.
A router is usually also always online and sits at the center of a network so it is the best place for it but there is nothing stopping someone from setting it up with commandline on a home device.
https://www.wireguard.com/quickstart/
There are many online video guides that cover different ways to do it (like docker)
In all casss you first setup a main server on the device that stays home and from it you generate a peer per device you want to connect. (A bunch of settings/codes) Sometimes a peer is a qr code that your device can scan (wireguard app for some devices) otherwise you have to manualy type.
Once set you can just leave it on. The only exception i found is some apps for local payments, presumably because they require both devices to report the same location to perform a transaction.
ohshit604@lemmy.halstead.host · 16 pts · 1d
Phone > WireGuard Tunnel to my House = Reap the benefits of my PiHole and other hosted services > WireGuard Tunnel to ProtonVPN endpoint = Reap the benefits of appearing outside my country
Essentially created my own multi-hop VPN, which I use 24/7 outside of my home-network.
LlilL@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 1d
May I ask how you have that setup? I’ve been trying to do exactly that using my Ubiquiti gear in the middle, but I don’t think I Ubiquiti’s UnifFi is capable.
ohshit604@lemmy.halstead.host · 6 pts · 1d
Picked myself up an Asus WRT router (AX86U) flashed it with Merlin firmware - the custom firmware includes a feature called “VPN Director” which lets me connect up to 5 different WireGuard clients and route my devices through whichever one I choose, given that the Asus WRT router is also capable of hosting its own WireGuard server I created a VPN director rule that routes that server through one of these clients.
The VPN director has a priority ruleset, so if for example WireGuard client 5 dies it will either kill all outbound connections and wait until it’s back online or fallback to WireGuard client 4, WireGuard client 1 being the highest priority right before WAN.
I like this setup because it’s my router doing the routing, not a secondary server hosting WireGuard like Tailscale.
Edit; It also works with oVPN if you prefer that protocol over WireGuard.
Squizzy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1d
Must look into Merlin, I want to stay away from closed source or US companies so Unifi was out.
Could you have a residential static VPN as one of the wireguard profiles and have it be somewhat local to you so you could use banking apps etc on specific devices? Trying to get this to pass the wife test but if streaming or banking is affected I will have to roll back to no vpn.
ohshit604@lemmy.halstead.host · 1 pts · 1d
Absolutely, my setup I have a catchall rule that captures the entire 10.6.0.0/24 range however I can specify the IP’s individually so if I want to put a remote device behind my WAN and not through another WireGuard tunnel I can do that.
You can kind of see that in my second screenshot in my previous comment, I have a couple devices individually behind WGC4 and my catchall rule sitting on WCG5, the router will prioritize WCG4 over WGC5.
Edit: the Asus router also comes with a built in DDNS feature, you can either use Asus’s free domains and associate your dynamic IP with them or setup your own domain, it’ll keep your A records up to date whenever your IP changes.
For example I use this script to update my Cloudflare record for my domain - https://github.com/clayauld/asus-merlin-cloudflare-ddns
MasterBlaster@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
I should probably try what the O.P. did as I also have an ASUS router with Merlin. However, in my case, I have a Synology NAS and I set up VPN on that and use that server as my VPN. I have a certificate-based sign-in through a single port on the router.
I use a Public VPN service when I'm out and about and then connect to my VPN when I need to do stuff on my network, Like syncing my Joplin notes.
thanksforallthefish@literature.cafe · 15 pts · 2d
Permanently on. Anything I can't access without it I generally find an alternate with very few exceptions. I have a quarantine virtual machine I use for the couple of websites that are worth making an exception for.
eremophila@lemmy.zip · 14 pts · 2d
always on
manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml · 14 pts · 2d
I use a VPN 99% of the time, i turn it off when i need to access archive.org, or watch something on the public braordcasters streaming platform
yeah sure the captchas are annoying but it's not like websites load within 10 seconds anymore
I only wish protonVPN was a good as the one i used previously, but i cancelled it cause it had ties to israel
utopiah@lemmy.ml · 3 pts · 2d
You might want to check into split tunneling.
Zedd_Prophecy@lemmy.world · 13 pts · 2d
I have a VPN configured at the router. I use a PI-hole with a lot of restrictions and lists to run my own DNS and downstream DNS is Adgaurd. Several machines I let bypass the VPN umbrella and they have local clients they can switch on at will. I'd like to make a Linux firewall too but not with prices where they are now. These days you have to distrust everything.
wuphysics87@lemmy.ml · 11 pts · 2d
Most of the time, but I would emphasize always in airports or public wifi
geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml · 11 pts · 1d
Alpinefolk@slrpnk.net · 10 pts · 2d
Always. The captcha drive me crazy though.
NauticalNoodle@lemmy.ml · 10 pts · 2d
98% of the time. I hate having to turn it off to look at my local grocery store's website but I have done it before.
RodgeGrabTheCat@sh.itjust.works · 10 pts · 2d
100% of the time I'm behind a vpn.
hexagon527@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 9 pts · 2d
always except for banking, government stuff, job searching. that's when it looks more sus.
NewNewAugustEast@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 2d
I am more inclined to use a VPN if I want government ibfornation. And that is really disappointing.
Fortunately I rarely have to interact with a government website for anything.
Ravenheart@lemmy.zip · 8 pts · 2d
Basically all the time.
gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 7 pts · 1d
UK porn ban, always-on VPN
swelter_spark@reddthat.com · 6 pts · 1d
I use tor for everything.
AfricanExpansionist@lemmy.ml · 6 pts · 1d
Everything??? Sounds slow
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 14h
If you use Tor Browser in the "safest" security setting, websites will actually load pretty fast since javascript will be disabled. Well, at least for the websites that load at all
gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 0 pts · 1d
Sounds like you've got a shit VPN if it's slow for you
sushiatnight@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
AfricanExpansionist is saying that using Tor for everything sounds slow, not that a VPN sounds slow.
gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 1 pts · 1d
Ah I fully misread then
pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 6 pts · 1d
All the time basically
somegeek@programming.dev · 5 pts · 2d
Constantly.
chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 5 pts · 2d
Mostly just for torrents, one machine on my local network is always using a VPN to connect to the external internet. I would use it for more things like private web browsing, but without substantial additional setup I think my web browsing is guaranteed to be fingerprinted regardless of whether I conceal my IP so until I bother to set that up it doesn't seem like there is much point.
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 2d
Do not try to do anti-fingerprinting yourself. Cobbling together your own configuration will only make you stand out more. Use a pre-configured browser from a reputable company. This way you blend in with everybody else using the same browser. And don't install extensions either unless you really know what you're doing. Extensions usually change your fingerprint.
Use Tor Browser for browsing over Tor, Mullvad Browser for everything else. Librewolf is fine for when you don't care about hiding your fingerprint, like when you are logging into email and bank accounts.
lemmingsareawesome@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2d
tried tor on tails and on whonix in a qubes vm. still being tracked by google. it might work for you though.
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 2d
If you enable Javascript there's still some crazy ways you can be tracked beyond the normal fingerprinting techniques. Stuff like mouse and keyboard tracking. Or looking at your behavior (what posts you view the longest, which photos you zoom into).
Disabling Javascript (using Tor Browser in the Safest setting) is the safest. Second to that, is enabling Javascript for websites you trust. You can use the NoScript extension to allow some scripts while blocking others. Usually you only need to allow scripts from the website itself, and block ones from third-parties like Google.
What were the issues you ran into?
lemmingsareawesome@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2d
i disable javascirpt and use safest setting
I use invidious to check if google is tracking me (i get recommended videos i like on the first page so i know its not behavoir fingerprint)
willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 1d
fonts, screen resolution, many things can affect fingerprint.
The solution is not "a browser from a reputable company."
It will be a browser designed by security professionals to spoof fingerprints, along with a "crawler" that analyzes the current blend of fingerprints already out there, crawling not web pages but the request headers instead, and canvas outputs, etc.
I don't think such a browser plus infrastructure exist yet, but they will. It is inevitable.
Such a browser will output garbage yet plausible and believable fingerprints that maximize ambiguity.
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 1d
What makes you think the Tor Browser and Mullvad Browser are not made by "security professionals"? Have you used either of them? They already have defenses against font, screen resolution, and many other fingerprinting vectors.
Also, "plausible and believable" fingerprints were already considered by Tor Browser and Mullvad Browser, and I believe are actively in use by Brave Browser. I forget why Tor Browser and Mullvad Browser opted to instead give everybody the same fingerprint, but there was a reason for it.
willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 17h
Of these Tor is the best for protecting identity, however Tor produces a recognizeably Tor-like fingerprint, which for my preference is not ideal.
So for example Tor browsers can all be denied access, because Tor, not the individual user, but the kind of browser used, can still be identified.
My ultimate latent goal isn't to only protect the anonymity of a security-conscious user, but to poison all fingerprinting data so that the entire technique is abandoned as useless.
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 16h
Adversarial methods like that won't work. Google will know when their data starts getting poisoned. Their ad targeting will lose effectiveness, their profit margin impacted. And they will tweak and tighten their trackers until they can squeeze out a good fingerprint again. In the end Google simply rolls out Web Environment Integrity, and consumers won't be able to use the web unless they prove their identity. If you want to fight big tech, this is the endgame they will push toward. If you want to play a cat and mouse game with big tech, big tech wins in the end since they have all the money.
Tor Browser recognizes this. So Tor Browser just erases any existing identifiers, while accepting that websites can identify Tor users and block them if they want. It's a very explicit signal that "this is a user that cares about privacy", and it's up to the website to accept that user or not. If a website doesn't care, then usually it will work fine in Tor Browser. If a website does care and tries to block Tor users, then Tor Browser doesn't bother fighting it. There are better places for them to focus their energy.
Ultimately if you want the web to be private, the only solution is to convince everybody else to want the same. Websites won't block privacy-seeking users, if everybody is a privacy-seeking user. Then, even big tech will have to concede.
willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 1 pts · 16h
Just fundamentally, to fight, you have want to win.
You are arguing to stop fighting on the basis of a supposedly improper desire. Wanting small bite sized things is proper. Wanting something audacious is not. Your kind of argument could work in theory if my desire is unserious. That's just psychology, not technology.
The scariness and the capabilities of an adversary is never, on their own, a proper reason to not fight.
The valid reasons can be: a deeply reasoned and deeply felt long term change in priorities, or a tactical hiatus to rest, regroup, reload. These are completely internal affairs, meaning, a serious person cannot be casually argued either into or out of these. I would check in with my soul to know whether or not to fight. Not with strangers on the net.
People fight to satisfy a certain hunger, and not because it looks easy or is a popular thing.
hirihit640@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 15h
But there's strategy to this. What I'm saying is that it's more productive for privacy advocates to spend their efforts convincing others that privacy is important, or pushing for privacy-friendly regulation, rather than trying to fight a war of attrition with big tech.
communism@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 1d
On at all times at the router level. Because it'd be annoying to selectively disable it. My VPN isn't really an anonymity feature anyway; I have a dedicated browser profile for things like banking where I intend the fingerprint to be associated with my government identity.
random_character_a@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 2d
In a way always.
Whole family is connected to home network and home network has filters and blockers in the outgoing router.
Additionally home security system doesn't have to keep connections open outside or have ports forwarded.
Outgoing router however does not have VPN set, so home network IP is visible. This is to keep everything operational and CAPTHCA from annoying users.
curious_dolphin@slrpnk.net · 2 pts · 2d
Aside from the obvious benefit of blocking advertising traffic for all devices on your home network, does this strategy also improve your ability to blend in by eliminating the need for an ad blocking browser extension such as ubo?
random_character_a@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
If I login to youtube and click a video, advertisments are mostly female hygiene products, braziers or frozen food products, because wife sometimes forgets to sign out from Facebook or Instagram. There also used to be gaming related stuff, but after my son became "privacy oriented", those.disappeared.
I'm guessing that for data brokers we are one singular blob.
Not sure about how it all effects on blending in.
technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 2d
Almost always. I turn off for certain websites that are blocked otherwise, but I hate to leave it off.
Nighed@feddit.uk · 4 pts · 2d
My phone almost always has a Vpn on to my home network (gets me pi-hole goodness)
Other than that, very occasionally use the Firefox built in one + the one for my "Linux iso" torrenting container, that's not on most of the time though.
Newhere@lemmy.ml · 4 pts · 1d
Alll the time with kill switch ON.
mildseason@sopuli.xyz · 3 pts · 19h
All the time, baby!
Unless it's absolutely necessary, vpn and kill switch stay on.
non_burglar@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 20h
100% of the time.
My VPN turns on automatically when I leave my home lan. I don't use split-tunneling, so all my traffic goes back to home before going to internet.
Brutticus@midwest.social · 3 pts · 1d
maybe like 75 percent of the time. the Invidious APIs for Freetube.
My job requires secure outlook and access to our database. I do occasionally have to interface with banking sites.
alexquiniou@lemmy.zip · 3 pts · 19h
Always. Wireguard is easy to setup and work like a charm.
Truenas + wireguard for pc, server and phone. Always everywhere.
SolarPunker@slrpnk.net · 3 pts · 2d
Never, I'm in EU and I don't travel that much, pirating since 2000s
realbadat@programming.dev · 3 pts · 2d
General activity goes out the VPN always. My self hosted setup, lab stuff, and work stuff gets different connections out (logically, not physically).
willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 1d
Always, unless by mistake it is off.
Crackhappy@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 17h
Always.
NutWrench@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
My VPN is on about 95% of the time, except when I need to pay a local utility bill (or check my bank account) where they need to know my location.
MasterBlaster@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
If you're paying them, why do they need to know your location to accept it? We're in a capitalist system. Money is money.
Fizz@lemmy.nz · 2 pts · 2d
24/7 on any device except my home PC.
dragospirvu75@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 1d
I would use VPN, but it makes my Bitcoin Node stop receiving incoming connections.
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2d
I never have. Don't know how to do it (I know it's not hard). The only use I occasionally have is blocked media, but I just don't watch whatever it is. It's not that important to me.
What's important to me is blocking ads, which I do as much as possible. The way I see it, the main point of them tracking me is to serve me ads, so I break the chain at the ads.
If I want privacy, I use Tor. Everything else seems like spitting into the wind.
Zerush@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 2d
I also think, ad/trackerblocker, Portmaster and common sense in what you public on the web is mostly enough (How much claims of the lack of privacy I saw in Facebook through the years...)
MasterBlaster@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1d
Always on although my Phone VPN recently has failed to start up automatically or has shut down randomly lately and I got to get that fixed.
My reasons are just privacy. I'm not using it to get around regional restrictions. Additionally, it helps when I want to use a public Wi-Fi, especially if it doesn't have any passports on it.
I will not connect to public wifi without VPN.
utopiah@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 2d
mostly against geoblocking when I want to watch public TV channels from while I'm not in the "right" country, e.g. when I want to watch PBS outside of the US, Arte outside of Europe (even though I dont think they block anymore), FranceTV outside of France, Ray out of Italy, etc.
Sometimes also for blocked content, e.g. PirateBay in France or AnnaArchive in Belgium but typically for these public proxies are enough.
Ah I also use self-hosted VPN for my own self-hosted services when I'm on the move but it is typically very small traffic.
FWIW I'm not using a large commercial ISP, so trusting my ISP is a big part of my behavior.
Pika@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 2d
if you include my intranet vpn daily, if you include external vpns generally only if I'm going to a hotel or a location I expect would be insecure.
Zerush@lemmy.ml · -1 pts · 2d
At home never, only sometimes a proxy (CyberGhost extension, Chrome, Firefox) in case of country restrictions. In my phone no need, I don't use public WiFi, it's enough with InVizible Pro. Apart the Portmaster app on desktop (Windows, Linux)
ohshit604@lemmy.halstead.host · 2 pts · 1d
Suggest digging into CyberGhost and their history and association with Kape Technologies.
https://windscribe.com/blog/what-is-kape-technologies/
Zerush@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 1d
Nice history, but the extension works as it should and its not a VPN (none of browser "VPN" extensions really is), but a proxy for which I use it sometimes for mentioned reasons. CyberGhost currently has alway an excellent review in IT publications and independent benchmarks, it don't log and also don't has any bandwith limits in the proxy only limits in the amount of servers, which is free to use (incomes through premium accounts in its VPN service). Nothing fishy in it. Windscribe is also good, but the free versin has a data limit, not so good for streaming services.
ohshit604@lemmy.halstead.host · 3 pts · 1d
In that very same article…
Whether or not you trust a company with the initial intention of distributing malware is on you, and by using their Proxy you’re still pushing your traffic to their servers albeit in a less-secure manner, and to believe they don’t retain your data is merely laughable as they’re obliged by the Five Eyes Alliance due to their headquarters being in London and are required to retain personal information you provide them.
I don’t use Windscribe myself because they’re a Canadian company and obliged by FVEY, but at least they’re independent from Kape Technologies.
Zerush@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 1d
Well, which sites of these are from Kape?
ohshit604@lemmy.halstead.host · 0 pts · 22h
Here you go, I’ve done my part in this discussion and from what I can tell you choose to remain ignorant to do any research yourself or to accept the provided data for what it is.
As I said in my previous comment this is your choice to support a company with the initial intention of distributing malware, I will not discuss this further.
Zerush@lemmy.ml · 0 pts · 18h
OK, distributing malware owned by other company >10years ago, anyway none of the pages I listed is mencioned in your Cyberinsider (?) link. Apart I never saw any fishy traffic in the monitoring. For sure you'll find negative reviews and malware claims for any other VPN, proxy extensions or other apps in the web if you search for it, the competitors also pay reviews. Yes, it's my choice, because it works exactly as it should.