News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:VPN – Very Precarious Narrative by wglb on Sunday April 07, 2019 @11:43PM (#19601827)
So what protection does a foreign VPN provider have from the NSA? The answer: None.
Re:VPN – Very Precarious Narrative by manquer on Sunday April 07, 2019 @11:55PM (#19601902)
If your threat model includes NSA you need to reconsider lot more than just a VPN
Re:VPN – Very Precarious Narrative by auslander on Monday April 08, 2019 @11:14AM (#19605914)
Disk encryption, firmware lockdown, home security with notifications, burner phones, Tails and Tor (via VPN), IRC, fleet of hacked Windows machines to route through, 10 online identities.
Re:VPN – Very Precarious Narrative by blackflame7000 on Monday April 08, 2019 @12:47AM (#19602208)
Windows Defender oughta do it /s
Re:VPN – Very Precarious Narrative by raxxorrax on Monday April 08, 2019 @02:25AM (#19602624)
I always recommend users to pick a VPN service in a country not on friendly terms with domestic agencies. Sure, that country gets your data but have a harder time correlating it with anything.

In my circle, VPN use starts to be requested by non-technical users that just want to minimize their digital footprint.

Seems amazing to me, since people spend 200$+ on a service for a year, so it seems rather important to them.

No reason not to use globalization to your own advantage.

Re:VPN – Very Precarious Narrative by pbhjpbhj on Monday April 08, 2019 @06:29AM (#19603859)
A foreign provide surely has more, in the legal realm, than a domestic one?
Re:VPN – Very Precarious Narrative by amdavidson on Monday April 08, 2019 @08:08AM (#19604413)
What legal protection from the NSA does a foreign (to the USA) provider have? Signals intelligence from foreign sources is the NSA's exact mission.

At least the NSA has a purported requirement not to do domestic spying, even if Snowden proved that's not being followed.

Re:VPN – Very Precarious Narrative by pbhjpbhj on Monday April 08, 2019 @09:45AM (#19605113)
I was thinking that a domestic entity has no protections from the NSA, they have to open up if NSA says so "for national security reasons"? Whilst a foreign entity has not requirements to do so. Both domestic and foreign entities are subject to the same practical abilities; ergo a foreign entity is safer?

As for "no domestic spying", I thought the five-eyes group spied on each other to order so as to circumvent those requirements in domestic law??