VPN Transparency Project

Author: markus

  • How the U.S. Government’s Secret Data Collection Program Threatens Your Privacy Rights—And What You Can Do About It

    How the U.S. Government’s Secret Data Collection Program Threatens Your Privacy Rights—And What You Can Do About It

    In a recent turn of events, a declassified report revealed that the U.S. government has been covertly compiling an extensive amount of sensitive information about its citizens. The previously undisclosed program, as elucidated by a panel of senior advisors, involves intricate business dealings between commercial data brokers and U.S. intelligence agencies. Through these transactions, the government has amassed vast troves of data, illuminating minute details of Americans’ lives. The magnitude of this operation and its implications are profound, posing a stark question about the balance between security and the fundamental right to privacy.

    Privacy is a cornerstone of a free society, serving as a barrier between individuals and potential abuses of power by the state. It grants citizens the autonomy to express themselves freely and engage in lawful activities without fear of unwarranted scrutiny. The covert data collection program, as exposed in the report, stands in stark contrast to this principle. By amassing sensitive information about its citizens without their knowledge or consent, the U.S. government has engaged in a sweeping abuse of power that could significantly erode the privacy rights that Americans hold dear. The critical question now is not only how this overreach occurred, but also what measures can be taken to restore the balance and protect the sanctity of personal privacy in the digital age.

    Big Data, Bigger Surveillance

    The scale and sensitivity of the information that the government is accessing is staggering. Data brokers, operating largely unchecked, have become the custodians of a vast array of personal information. The data range from general demographic details to more intimate insights such as location history, online browsing habits, and even social interactions. With the exponential growth in smartphone use and the proliferation of internet tracking technologies, the volume of data being generated and thus available for collection has reached unprecedented levels.

    Smartphones, in particular, have facilitated this dramatic increase in data generation. The devices we carry with us everywhere are essentially data factories, continuously producing and transmitting data. Coupled with other innovations like connected cars, web tracking technologies, and the Internet of Things, the scale of potential surveillance has broadened significantly.

    Ironically, the same technologies that have been hailed as tools of freedom and connection have also become tools of surveillance. A large part of the problem lies in how the government treats the data it purchases. The declassified report reveals a troubling interpretation: any data sold by these brokers is treated as “publicly available”.

    However, the “public” nature of this data is misleading. Even though data brokers may sell the information, it doesn’t mean the information is devoid of personal identifiers. In fact, the report points out that it is often trivial to ‘deanonymize’ and identify individuals from the packaged data. Thus, information initially collected for one purpose can potentially be reused for other more invasive purposes, like tracking an individual’s location or monitoring their social interactions.

    In essence, the government’s broad definition of “publicly available information” allows for the mass collection of incredibly revealing data, which under traditional circumstances would require a warrant. The so-called ‘publicly available’ nature of this data is providing a veil of legality for what is essentially a mass surveillance operation on a scale never before seen.

    When Laws Can’t Keep Up with Tech

    The government’s clandestine data collection program is not just a product of technological advancements but also a consequence of exploiting legal ambiguities and loopholes. The laws currently governing privacy rights and data collection were conceived in an era where the technological capabilities we have today were scarcely imaginable. As such, these laws have struggled to adapt to our rapidly evolving digital landscape, creating a fertile ground for legal maneuvering.

    One of the most significant legal ambiguities that the government appears to be exploiting is the interpretation of what constitutes “publicly available information.” The Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s (ODNI) panel of advisors made it clear in their declassified report that the government’s static interpretations of this term pose a significant threat to the public. The advisors decry existing policies that automatically conflate the ability to buy information with it being considered “public”​1​.

    Perhaps the most controversial revelation from the report is that the government believes it can “persistently” track the phones of “millions of Americans” without a warrant as long as it pays for the information. If the government were to demand access to a device’s location instead, it would be considered a Fourth Amendment “search” and would require a judge’s signoff. But because the same companies are willing to sell the information, the government considers it “publicly available” and therefore “can purchase it”​.

    The report also notes how our modern technology has inadvertently created a vast surveillance system without direct government participation: “The government would never have been permitted to compel billions of people to carry location tracking devices on their persons at all times, to log and track most of their social interactions, or to keep flawless records of all their reading habits. Yet smartphones, connected cars, web tracking technologies, the Internet of Things, and other innovations have had this effect”​.

    This exploitation of legal ambiguities highlights the urgent need for comprehensive privacy reform. It also emphasizes the importance of transparency in how the government interprets and applies these laws, given their far-reaching implications for individual privacy and civil liberties.

    Your Constitutional Rights, Online and Under Fire

    The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution is a cornerstone of our civil liberties, designed to protect citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. It requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. This amendment is fundamental in maintaining the balance of power between the state and its citizens and preserving our right to privacy.

    However, the government’s clandestine data collection program is posing a considerable threat to these Fourth Amendment rights. One of the key arguments in the declassified report is that the government considers it can “persistently” track the phones of “millions of Americans” without a warrant as long as it pays for the information. This stance is a clear deviation from the principles of the Fourth Amendment, which would require a judge’s signoff for such an intrusive “search”​1​.

    The fact that private companies are willing to sell data doesn’t negate the need for constitutional protections. Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights should not become void simply because a credit card transaction was used to acquire their personal information. The willingness of companies to sell this data should not serve as a backdoor for the government to bypass our constitutional rights.

    The Fourth Amendment was designed to protect citizens from the overreach of government power. The government’s current approach to data collection, as revealed in this report, appears to exploit technological advancements and legal ambiguities to sidestep these protections. This raises serious questions about the erosion of our constitutional rights in the digital age and the need for urgent legislative reform to address these challenges.

    Congress has the Power, But Will They Use It?

    The exposure of this data collection program demands immediate and decisive action from Congress. The current state of affairs reveals a disturbing disregard for the privacy rights of Americans, and Congress has a crucial role to play in addressing this issue. This situation calls for a two-pronged approach: restricting the government’s access to this data and closing the legal loopholes that enable such overreach.

    First, it is imperative that Congress places clear and enforceable limitations on the government’s ability to purchase data from brokers. Current legislation has not kept pace with technological advancements, leaving room for wide-ranging interpretations that have led to this situation. Existing laws need to be revised to clearly define what constitutes “publicly available information” and to limit the government’s ability to purchase and use such data for surveillance purposes.

    Second, the loopholes that enable this overreach must be closed. The government’s reliance on loose interpretations of aging laws to justify this massive data collection is a clear sign of the need for legislative reform. Laws that were enacted in a different technological era cannot be expected to adequately address the challenges and potential abuses that come with the digital age.

    Congress must act swiftly. The alternative is a deepening surveillance state that further erodes the privacy rights of Americans and undermines our constitutional protections. The unchecked growth of this surveillance program threatens to fundamentally alter the balance of power between the government and its citizens. We must ensure that our legal frameworks evolve in tandem with technology to safeguard our rights in the digital age.

    Freedom Requires Action: How You Can Help Stop the Surveillance State

    The revelations of this secret program underscore the alarming reality of our modern surveillance state: it’s overreaching, out of touch, and poses a direct threat to our fundamental privacy rights. However, in this adversity lies opportunity. With focused and swift action from Congress to limit the government’s access to commercially available data and to reinforce our constitutional boundaries, we can recalibrate the balance. The future of privacy in the digital age is far from doomed—it’s moldable. As we move forward, we must remember that the power to shape this future is in our hands. By taking bold legislative steps today, we can ensure that our privacy rights are upheld tomorrow, forging a digital landscape where freedom and security coexist harmoniously.

  • Is Macedonia a good country for VPNs?

    Is Macedonia a good country for VPNs?

    Macedonia, now officially known as North Macedonia, offers a fairly reasonable environment for VPN server hosting. On the Privacy Protection Index (PPI), it falls within the Average category. While it doesn’t have comprehensive privacy laws comparable to GDPR in the EU, the country has demonstrated a commitment to uphold internet freedoms.

    Macedonia has no explicit laws prohibiting the use of VPNs or specific encryption standards, which is a positive for VPN providers. However, its data retention laws are worth noting as they require internet service providers to store customer metadata for a certain period of time, potentially affecting anonymity.

    When it comes to P2P file sharing, Macedonia doesn’t have stringent enforcement, but copyright laws still apply. It’s not a hotbed for copyright trolls but caution is advised for P2P users.

    Overall, while Macedonia offers a decent environment, countries like Romania or the Netherlands in close geographic proximity may provide superior privacy protections and greater legal clarity, especially in the areas of P2P activities and data retention laws. These countries score Above Average on the PPI, making them more ideal for VPN server locations.

    VPN servers in Macedonia:

    Related Posts

  • Surfshark launches dedicated IPs

    Surfshark launches dedicated IPs

    Surfshark, a well-known VPN service, recently announced the introduction of a new feature: Dedicated IP addresses. This feature was officially launched on June 7, 2023, signaling a significant step for the company and its clients​.

    Before diving into the specifics of the new feature, it’s essential to understand the difference between shared and dedicated IP addresses. Shared IP addresses, as the name suggests, are used by multiple people at the same time. On the other hand, a dedicated IP address is exclusively assigned to a single user and doesn’t change over time.

    Surfshark’s new Dedicated IP feature aims to offer users more control and consistency in their online experience. Here are some of the key advantages:

    Remote Network Access: Dedicated IPs are excellent for accessing networks remotely. With a shared VPN service, the user’s IP address changes frequently, complicating the process of accessing remote assets. A dedicated IP ensures that the user’s address remains the same, regardless of location, simplifying the process and adding an extra layer of security​.

    Avoidance of IP Blocklisting: Since shared IP addresses are used by multiple individuals, they can be more susceptible to blocklisting due to the actions of other users. With a dedicated IP, only the actions of the owner of the IP address can result in blocklisting​.

    Access to IP-Sensitive Services: Some services require a consistent IP address, such as online banking or cryptocurrency trading platforms. A dedicated IP address provides this consistency​.

    Reduced CAPTCHA Requests: When many people share the same VPN server, websites can identify these repetitive requests as robotic, leading to more CAPTCHA requests. A dedicated IP can help mitigate this issue​.

    While the new feature brings several benefits, it’s essential to note that the choice between a shared or dedicated IP ultimately depends on the user’s individual needs and threat model. For instance, while a dedicated IP offers certain conveniences, it also presents some potential privacy concerns. A dedicated IP is linked to the user’s email address and can be traced back to the user if their email account is compromised. This contrasts with a shared IP, where users’ online activities are mixed, making it harder to trace activities back to an individual. However, Surfshark offers an anonymous Dedicated IP option that removes the link between the user’s IP and email, providing an additional layer of privacy if desired​.

    Dedicated vs Static vs Shared

    Many VPN providers offer static IP addresses as part of their services, often at no additional cost. A static IP address is still a shared resource among multiple users, similar to the usual shared IP approach. However, unlike dynamic IPs that change every time you connect, a static IP remains the same over time. For users looking for a balance between the consistency of a dedicated IP and the anonymity of a shared IP, a static IP could be an ideal solution. It offers a degree of stability for accessing IP-sensitive services, yet maintains some level of shared anonymity. This option could be a “happy medium,” providing the benefits of both shared and dedicated IP addresses without the potential privacy concerns linked to dedicated IPs.

    In conclusion, Surfshark’s new feature offering dedicated IPs provides users with more control, convenience, and stability in their online experiences. However, users must weigh these benefits against potential privacy considerations based on their individual threat model and personal needs.

  • Enough is Enough: Why I Block Ads and You Should Too

    Enough is Enough: Why I Block Ads and You Should Too

    Table of Contents

    Let’s face it – online ads can be annoying and obnoxious. We’ve all been distracted by flashing banner ads or accidentally clicked on misleading “download here” links. But ads don’t just interrupt your web browsing, they actually threaten your privacy. Ad networks track nearly everything you do online to build a profile of you and target ads. They collect data about your location, interests, browsing history, and more. This information is then auctioned off to advertisers and exploited to manipulate you.

    Blocking online ads is one of the easiest things you can do to protect your privacy and improve your web experience. By blocking ads, you escape the annoyance of intrusive ads and also limit how much of your personal data is gathered by ad networks and third parties. You reduce targeted advertising and decrease threats from malware and scams that frequently spread through ads. Ultimately, you take control of your online privacy back from ad companies profiting off your information.

    For most casual web users, the choice is clear – you should block online ads. The minor inconvenience of potentially supporting some websites and services with ad revenue is dwarfed by the privacy benefits of ad blocking. Your data and web experience will be better for it.

    Mmm… Cookies

    Have you ever wondered how ad networks seem to know so much about you to target ads? It’s not magic – it’s through precise tracking of your online activity, including using “cookies” to assign you a unique ID to link your data. According to a report from Clearcode, ad networks place cookies on nearly every website you visit to gather details about you like your location, browsing history, device info, and more. All to build an extensive “ad profile” of you.

    This type of invasive data profiling and targeted advertising threatens your privacy. In a recent study, researchers found people’s real names, addresses and other sensitive info could easily be inferred from their ad profiles. It’s alarming, and a key reason why ad blocking is essential to protecting your privacy online.

    By blocking ads, you cut off the data supply chain that fuels privacy invasion. Ad networks lose access to your information and can no longer easily build a profile of you. While ad revenue supports some websites and services, increasingly aggressive data gathering by ad companies far outweighs this downside for privacy-conscious users.

    You may not realize how much of your personal data ad networks currently hold about you or how vulnerable that data is. But with one simple step, enabling an ad blocker, you can opt out of this non-consensual data grab. Blocking ads not only avoids annoying pop-ups but prevents companies from monitoring your activity and amassing details about you.

    Overall, ad blocking gives you a choice in an online world where your privacy and agency often seem out of your control. If you’re tired of intrusive ads and uncomfortable with how easily your information is exploited, download an ad blocker today.

    The Threat of Malvertising

    Ad networks have also been used to spread malware and malicious software through a technique called “malvertising.” In these attacks, hackers disguise malware as legitimate ads to infect users undetected. Some alarming examples:

    • In 2015, a major malvertising campaign infected millions of users with malware disguised as ads for popular websites like Google, Facebook, and YouTube. The malware was able to steal personal information, such as passwords and credit card numbers, from infected computers.
    • In 2016, a malvertising campaign targeted users of Hulu. The ads appeared to be legitimate Hulu ads but installed malware to steal users’ personal information and track their browsing.
    • In 2017, Twitter users fell victim to a malvertising scheme infecting computers with info-stealing malware camouflaged as Twitter ads.

    Malvertising highlights how insecure the vast, automated ad networks have become. Billions of ads are now served each day, and hackers have found ways to disguise malware to evade detection. By blocking ads, you significantly reduce the risks from malvertising – cutting off the channel of attack. While ad companies work to improve security, users are left vulnerable and often without a choice as these malicious ads spread through trusted platforms and services.

    Ad blocking provides a much-needed defense that users have control over. You get to choose what code executes on your devices and which sources you trust. Rather than waiting as a sitting duck for the next major malvertising attack, you can proactively block ads and better protect yourself from these types of privacy threats. For anyone concerned about security and control over their data, ad blocking is a prudent safeguard against the rise of malvertising and other malicious targeting of ads.

    More than just annoying

    According to a 2022 study focusing on the effects of disruptive ads, web ads can be disruptive to our online experience and productivity. Pop-up ads, flashing banners, and auto-playing video ads abruptly interrupt our cognitive processes and drag our attention away from the main content we are trying to consume. The study found that these forced interruptions elicit negative emotions like frustration and anger in users. During ad interruptions, the study found that users experience higher cognitive load as measured by eye movements, have more unstable eye movements, and show higher levels of irritation as measured by facial expression analysis. The disruptive nature of web ads likely stems from the tension between marketers’ desire to grab users’ attention and the users’ desire for an uninterrupted experience. Though ads provide value by delivering information, they can come at the cost of reducing focus and wasting our limited time and attention online. However, according to the study, marketers may be able to lessen the irritating effects of interruptive ads by employing more emotionally compelling and intense negative content that can more effectively redirect users’ attention. Ultimately, balancing the goals of advertisers and users will require approaches that minimize disruption while maximizing value and relevance.

    Ad-blocking arms race

    Ad blockers are not a cure-all solution and have their weaknesses. Some ads may evade detection, particularly native ads and sponsored content that blend in with regular content. Additionally, companies like Netflix, YouTube, and Hulu have developed methods to circumvent ad blockers. Using a technique called server-side ad insertion (SSAI), these platforms insert ads directly into the video stream itself. Since the ads originate from the same server as the content, ad blockers have a harder time distinguishing and blocking them. While ad blockers provide benefits to users like reducing interruptions, companies are actively working to find ways around them to continue generating revenue from ads. The ad blocking arms race continues.

    For those looking to block ads at a deeper level, DNS-based ad blockers are an option. Tools like Pi-Hole, NextDNS, and AdGuard Home act as a DNS sinkhole for ad domains. Rather than blocking ads after a webpage has loaded, these services prevent your devices from even connecting to ad servers in the first place. By blacklisting ad domains at the DNS level, not only do these blockers stop ads in browsers but they can also block ads in mobile apps and smart TV interfaces. However, DNS ad blocking also has its limits. If an ad is served from the same domain as the content itself, DNS filtering alone may not be able to block it. For the most comprehensive ad blocking, using a multi-pronged approach of browser plugins, DNS blocking, and other tools is the most effective approach.

    Conclusion

    While ads provide value to content creators and fund many free services, they come with significant costs to users’ privacy, security, and experience. Ad networks amass huge amounts of personal data and leave users vulnerable to threats like malvertising by distributing billions of ads each day with little oversight. As more aspects of our lives move online, the data collected about us becomes ever more sensitive and vulnerable. Ad blocking gives users a choice to opt out of this imbalance and protect themselves.

    For most casual web users seeking to guard their privacy and improve their online experience, enabling an ad blocker is one of the simplest and most effective steps you can take. You escape annoying and distracting ads, block invasive tracking of your activity, reduce malware risks, and prevent advertisers from exploiting your data. Despite content companies actively working to circumvent blockers, a multi-pronged approach using browser extensions, DNS filters and other tools can block most ads and neutering ad networks’ ability to profile you.

    While ad blocking may inconvenience some websites and services reliant on ad revenue, for privacy-conscious users the benefits are clear. Ad blocking allows you to browse the web freely without always feeling like you’re being watched and your information co-opted for profit. You take back control of your data and reclaim your agency online. For these reasons, ad blocking provides an essential safeguard that everyone should consider enabling. The choice is ultimately up to you, but you deserve to know the substantial costs of leaving your data and devices undefended. You have the power to block ads – and the many threats they introduce – with just a few clicks. Why not start today?

  • OSINT

    OSINT

    .stk-0454f45{max-width:472px !important;padding-top:0px !important;padding-right:0px !important;padding-bottom:0px !important;padding-left:0px !important}.stk-0454f45 ol{list-style-type:decimal !important}

    Table of Contents

    1. Methods for staying anonymous
    2. Silk Road: Case Analysis
    3. The devil is in the details
    4. Pieces of a puzzle
    5. Conclusion

    The story of Ross Ulbricht, owner of the infamous dark web marketplace Silk Road, serves as a cautionary tale of the need for extreme vigilance to maintain online anonymity. Ulbricht’s sloppy digital footprint and complacency ultimately led to his arrest and life sentence, despite his efforts to create a seemingly “trustless” and secure marketplace. His downfall illustrates that true anonymity requires rigorous operational security and constant resistance to complacency. The smallest details revealed online can provide critical clues to one’s real identity, as recent MIT research has shown. Therefore, maintaining anonymity demands mindfulness in what we share digitally and a commitment to evade the ever-watching algorithms designed to strip away our privacy. While technology will continue to evolve, humans still retain the power to push back through restraint, unpredictability and a conscious assertion of our right to exist anonymously online.

    Methods for staying anonymous

    Evading algorithms and maintaining online anonymity is a constant cat-and-mouse game. As soon as you find a new technique to hide your identity, the algorithms evolve to catch up.

    The key to staying one step ahead is to think like a human, not a machine. Algorithms rely on data patterns and statistical correlations to identify individuals. But humans are messy, unpredictable and nonsensical at times. That complexity makes us difficult for algorithms to model with certainty.

    So the best tactic is to behave inconsistently and unpredictably from the perspective of an algorithm. Change up your browsing habits regularly. Use different devices, networks and usernames. Limit the personal details you share online. Fill out forms and profiles with random or inaccurate data. Stay conscious of the data “exhaust” you are leaving behind with every search, click and post.

    Most importantly, you have to get into the right mindset. envision yourself as a character in a story who wants to remain anonymous. Think about how that character would behave, what details they would reveal and what false leads they would leave. Then act the part accordingly across all your online interactions.

    By cultivating this “performance of anonymity,” you can throw off algorithms that depend on behavioral patterns and consistency. Machines still struggle to comprehend the complexities, contradictions and idiosyncrasies of human nature. So harnessing that unpredictability inherent in human thought and behavior may be our best strategy for maintaining privacy against the onslaught of ever more sophisticated algorithms.

    In the end, algorithms are what we make of them. It is up to us as humans to be mindful, intentional actors online in order to preserve our digital freedoms.

    Silk Road: Case Analysis

    The downfall of Silk Road owner Ross Ulbricht is a cautionary tale about the need for extreme vigilance and anonymity when operating dark web marketplaces. While the Silk Road purports to offer “trustless transactions” and near-impenetrable security, Ulbricht’s sloppy digital footprint ultimately led to his arrest and life sentence.

    Some observers chalk up Ulbricht’s mistakes to arrogance – the misguided belief that he was smarter than law enforcement and too clever to get caught. But others argue it was just plain stupidity and negligence on Ulbricht’s part. Either way, the lessons are clear:

    True anonymity requires rigorous operational security and constant resistance to complacency. Even the slightest identifying detail like an email address, username or time zone can provide a thread for investigators to pull. Ulbricht reused the same “altoid” username across multiple sites, a rookie mistake that betrayed his identity.

    Those seeking to operate illicit online marketplaces must assume law enforcement is always watching, ready to pounce on any mistake. They cannot get comfortable that their platform is “impenetrable” or that they are anonymous behind a pseudonym. Complacency breeds carelessness, and carelessness often leads to arrest.

    Ulbricht’s story illustrates the gap between the myth of the “untouchable cybercriminal” and the reality of law enforcement’s technological capabilities. While some dark web operators may believe they are invisible, the combination of undercover infiltration, subpoenas, warrants and data analysis gives law enforcement significant investigative powers.

    If Ulbricht had maintained true digital discipline and anonymity – using fresh usernames, email addresses, devices and precautions against data leaks – he may have evaded arrest much longer. But his tragic downfall serves as a warning for any would-be dark web entrepreneurs: operational security demands constant vigilance, or risk losing everything in a moment of stupidity or arrogance.

    The devil is in the details

    Recent research from MIT highlights just how little data is needed to identify individuals online. In a 2015 study, MIT researchers found that just four spatiotemporal data points—like time-stamped location pings from a mobile device—are enough to uniquely identify 95% of people in a data set of 1.5 million anonymous people. With just two data points, more than 50% of people could still be identified.

    These startling findings show that our online anonymity is far more fragile than most realize. Even a tiny handful of seemingly trivial details about our daily movements and behaviors can act as a “fingerprint” leading directly back to our real-world identity. When algorithms have access to our browsing histories, purchase records, social media posts and more, the amount of identifiable information they can collect on each of us grows exponentially.

    As the MIT research confirms, anonymity online is increasingly difficult to achieve as algorithms become more adept at drawing connections between the digital and physical world. But we must continue to make the effort through vigilance, operational security and thoughtful curation of our data. If we fatalistically accept that privacy is dead in the digital age, we implicitly hand more power and control of information over to algorithms that thrive on data about human behavior and interaction. Maintaining anonymity is a fight worth having, even if it requires mindful and constant evasion of an adversary designed to never stop watching.

    Pieces of a puzzle

    You must be cautious of any details you share online, as seemingly harmless anecdotes or experiences could reveal clues to your real identity over time. A practiced “online adversary” could piece together these scattered puzzle pieces and narrow their search for you.

    Small clues like your age, geographic location, job, hobbies, interests, memories from childhood or college – all of these specific yet common details could help someone determine who you are in real life. Even details about your friends, family or current events you experienced can provide linkages if someone is determined enough and doing open source intelligence (OSINT) research on you.

    The key is to remain conscious of all information you reveal in your online persona. Assume anything you post or say could potentially be traced back to you, even jokes or offhand comments. Avoid sharing personal anecdotes, specific memories, autobiographical details or anything likely to be unique to you. The more general and obscure you can remain, the harder it will be for someone to build a profile of your real identity from your digital traces. At the same time, don’t fabricate false details – they create a new profile for authorities to unravel and may ultimately reveal more than they hide. The safest approach is sharing as little identifiable information as possible.

    Conclusion

    In the end, upholding your online anonymity ultimately comes down to you – the choices you make, the diligence you practice and the strategies you employ across all your digital interactions. While technology and algorithms will continue to evolve, posing new threats to privacy, humans still retain the power to withstand these challenges through vigilance, unpredictability and restraint.

    Let the story of Ross Ulbricht serve as both a warning and inspiration. His failure shows the consequences of complacency, but also illuminates a path forward throughoperational security and digital discipline. The keys to online anonymity – limiting shared details, behaving unpredictably, changing your digital routines – remain within our grasp as human beings, if we choose to pick them up.

    The implications go beyond any one individual, impacting how we preserve digital freedoms and protest state surveillance through the very possibility of online anonymity. So I urge my readers to consider the small but meaningful steps you can take today to assert your right to exist anonymously in digital spaces. Fill out fewer forms with your real data, use a VPN, adopt a new username. Make mindful decisions to share less and keep more to yourself.

    Together, through our individual yet concerted efforts to reclaim and responsibly wield online anonymity, we can push back on the erosion of privacy in the digital age. The choice – and power – begins with each one of us.

    See also:

  • Global Coverage in VPNs: Windscribe Case Analysis

    Global Coverage in VPNs: Windscribe Case Analysis

    .stk-6a99281 ol{list-style-type:decimal !important}html{scroll-behavior:smooth !important}

    Table of Contents

    1. Methodology
    2. Findings
      1. Visual #1
      2. Visual #2
    3. Global Coverage Analysis
    4. Implications and Further Study
    5. Conclusion

    Virtual Private Networks, or VPNs as they are commonly known, are vital tools in the digital age. They allow users to browse the internet safely and privately by creating a secure, encrypted connection between their device and the internet. This not only safeguards users’ data from potential threats but also allows them to bypass geographic restrictions, providing a global internet experience free of borders.

    The study of VPN server distribution is an intriguing yet often overlooked area of internet research. By examining where VPN providers place their servers globally, we gain invaluable insight into patterns of internet use, cybersecurity concerns, and technological infrastructure. Furthermore, understanding this distribution can shed light on internet freedoms and digital accessibility across different nations.

    As our world becomes increasingly interconnected, such analysis becomes ever more crucial. It provides us with the capacity to understand the changing landscape of the internet and its implications on global communication, data security, and individual freedoms. Let’s delve into this fascinating area of study.

    Methodology

    This study draws upon a comprehensive dataset of Windscribe servers, covering the global distribution of available servers throughout the year 2023. We included all countries represented in this dataset, spanning all seven continents and a multitude of diverse regions.

    To accurately assess the VPN server distribution, we categorized servers by their physical locations, aligning them with their respective countries. The subsequent step involved mapping these countries to their continents, providing us with two primary levels of data granularity: country-level and continent-level distribution.

    Our investigation then took a per-capita approach to make sense of these findings. Considering raw server counts could be misleading due to significant population differences between countries. To obtain more balanced and meaningful insights, we calculated servers per million population for each country. This involved dividing the number of servers in each country by its population and multiplying the result by one million. The resultant metric gives us an intuitive sense of the density of VPN servers in relation to the country’s population, ensuring fair comparisons across countries of different sizes.

    Through these methodologies, we aimed to paint a comprehensive and precise picture of global VPN server distribution. Now, let’s discuss our main findings.

    Findings

    When exploring the VPN server landscape of Windscribe, we noticed certain intriguing patterns in the global distribution of servers.

    Our analysis showed that the distribution of servers is not uniform across all continents. North America and Europe collectively host the majority of this VPN company’s servers, accounting for approximately 81% of its global total. Meanwhile, Asia, despite having a large share of the world’s population, is home to only 9% of this company’s total servers. Oceania and South America house about 4% and 2% respectively. Africa, unfortunately, is where this VPN provider’s presence is least felt, representing less than 2% of its servers.

    The United States, with its technologically advanced infrastructure, stands out in this particular VPN network with the highest server count. Conversely, countries like Sweden and Albania, despite their smaller populations, also have a significant presence in this network, especially when we consider server density on a per capita basis.

    Our per capita analysis revealed that the raw count of servers doesn’t necessarily align with population size. Despite having smaller total numbers, Sweden and Albania each have a high number of servers per million people, indicating a dense VPN network for their population size. On the flip side, some larger countries with a higher overall server count, like India, have a less dense server distribution when considered from a per capita perspective.

    This per capita approach gives us a more balanced view, making for meaningful comparisons across nations. It helped identify overperformers and underperformers within this VPN provider’s network, highlighting the uneven distribution of servers. As such, it paves the way for deeper conversations about VPN accessibility and digital freedom across different regions, even within a single provider’s network.

    Visual #1

    This heatmap reveals the global concentration of VPN servers at a city level, based on data from May 2023. Toronto, Richmond Hill, and Atlanta lead the pack with 134, 85, and 78 servers respectively. Interestingly, major cities like New York City, London, and Paris also have substantial server presences, reflecting the high demand and internet connectivity in these metropolitan areas. The diverse distribution of servers across continents highlights the global reach and accessibility of this particular VPN provider’s network.

    Visual #2

    Global Coverage Analysis

    While opportunities exist to augment their infrastructure, Windscribe’s current global VPN network demonstrates broad international coverage. They maintain servers in over 50 nations across all continents, with a presence in regions often lacking coverage from smaller VPN providers. Though server counts vary, Windscribe delivers the foundation for global VPN accessibility.

    Windscribe has the most servers in North America and parts of Europe, including over 700 nodes in the United States and over 100 in the United Kingdom. They also have a notable presence in Brazil with 22 servers, Russia with 39 servers, and Africa with locations in Ghana, Kenya, South Africa, and the UAE. While Windscribe could boost server counts in these regions to compete with the highest levels, their current coverage allows them to deliver VPN services across diverse international markets.

    There may be opportunities for Windscribe to supplement their global network by adding servers in regions with strong internet usage growth. Increasing server concentrations in emerging markets like Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia could capture demand among expanding customer segments. However, Windscribe’s existing infrastructure – encompassing all inhabited continents and over half of the world’s nations – already provides VPN services at a scale that international users would find broadly accessible. With more than adequate global foundations in place, Windscribe can consider targeted growth that builds on – rather than fundamentally alters – their robust international coverage.

    Implications and Further Study

    Our findings offer an intriguing snapshot of the geographic distribution of Windscribe’s servers in May 2023. However, as with any study, the results come with a caveat: the data and findings presented here represent a single point in time and are subject to change. For future studies and to maintain accuracy, this analysis should ideally be updated at regular intervals.

    Interestingly, our findings indicate that the size and density of a VPN provider’s network can directly impact user experience. It is no secret that a VPN user is likely to experience less latency with a server closer to their physical location. Therefore, broader global coverage, resulting in lower latencies, could be a significant advantage for a VPN provider.

    However, as this analysis provides raw server totals, we can only speculate why the VPN provider in question has chosen to set up their network in this specific manner. Factors such as local laws, market demand, and technological infrastructure could all influence this decision, but without direct information, these remain educated guesses.

    Moreover, our study does not provide insight into the demographics or preferences of the provider’s user base. It is important to recognize that every VPN user has unique needs and desires, whether it be for privacy, accessing geo-restricted content, or maintaining secure communications. Understanding user preferences could certainly provide another layer of depth to such analyses.

    A key limitation of our study is that it only looks at the geographical distribution of servers. It does not consider other crucial factors like ISP/ASN diversity, the variety of IP addresses, the quality of the servers, among others. Future research could certainly focus on these aspects for a more comprehensive evaluation of VPN services.

    Finally, it’s worth noting that this is just one of many methods that we’ve employed to analyze VPN providers. Our upcoming publications will dive into other approaches to continue shedding light on this ever-evolving digital landscape, ensuring users are as informed as possible when making their VPN choices. Stay tuned!

    Conclusion

    In our digital world, where privacy, security, and unrestricted access to information are more important than ever, understanding the dynamics of VPN server distribution becomes crucial. Through this study, we’ve taken a look at a particular VPN provider’s server distribution as of May 2023, offering a unique glimpse into the complex landscape of virtual private networks.

    Our study reveals fascinating patterns and disparities in global VPN server distribution. Despite these insights, it’s essential to remember that our understanding of this field is still developing. As such, these findings shouldn’t be interpreted as the final word but rather a stepping stone towards more comprehensive future analyses.

    In addition, our examination underscores the need for continued investigation into VPN server infrastructure and policies. Factors like local laws, technological capabilities, and user demand shape the geographical distribution of servers. However, they represent just the tip of the iceberg in terms of what influences VPN server placements.

    Ultimately, these findings emphasize that, as consumers, we must strive to better understand the services we use daily. So, we encourage you to dive deeper, question more, and stay informed. Whether you’re a VPN user concerned about connection speed and security, or a curious observer interested in the intricacies of digital infrastructures, there’s always more to learn.

    As we continue to analyze and understand VPN providers using various methods, we invite you to join us on this journey. There’s plenty more to uncover, so keep reading, keep questioning, and stay tuned for more insights.

    See also:

  • Mullvad VPN to Remove Port Forwarding Feature, Citing Security Concerns

    Mullvad VPN to Remove Port Forwarding Feature, Citing Security Concerns

    In a move that has drawn attention from the cybersecurity community, Mullvad VPN, a popular provider known for its commitment to privacy, has announced it is discontinuing support for port forwarding. The company cites frequent misuse of this feature, leading to negative experiences for the majority of its users, and more troublingly, garnering unwanted attention from law enforcement agencies.

    Port forwarding is a networking technique that allows remote computers to connect to a specific computer or service within a private local area network (LAN). In the context of a VPN service, port forwarding could be used to enable friends or family to access a service running behind the VPN, such as a legitimate website, a game server, or a self-hosted server.

    However, the darker side of this coin has caught up with Mullvad, prompting the drastic decision to entirely remove the feature. The misuse of port forwarding can open avenues for abuse, with nefarious individuals utilizing this feature to host undesirable content and malicious services. This has resulted in Mullvad’s IP addresses being blacklisted, hosting providers cancelling their services, and law enforcement contacting the company.

    The compromise Mullvad has chosen is a challenging one. On one hand, it protects the majority of its users who may not be using port forwarding, ensuring their VPN experience is not negatively impacted by the actions of a few. On the other hand, it limits the functionality of the service for those users who were using port forwarding for legitimate purposes.

    The removal of the port forwarding feature may be seen as a positive move from a cybersecurity perspective. By eliminating this feature, Mullvad is taking a stand against the potential for misuse and abuse that port forwarding can enable. This could include activities such as operating rogue servers, distributing illegal content, or even hosting phishing sites, all of which can be done by malicious actors who take advantage of port forwarding to hide their activities behind the VPN.

    Nevertheless, the decision also brings with it a negative impact on the versatility of Mullvad’s service. Port forwarding is a useful feature for power users who require remote access to services behind their VPN. This includes scenarios such as running a remote game server, providing access to a self-hosted website, or facilitating peer-to-peer file sharing. By removing this feature, Mullvad could risk alienating a segment of their user base who rely on these capabilities.

    Community Reaction

    On Twitter, several users expressed disappointment and concern about the removal of the port forwarding feature, stating that it was essential for their use of the service, and suggesting that Mullvad could have addressed the problem by limiting port forwarding to certain servers​. Some users, however, appreciated the decision, commending Mullvad for prioritizing the quality of their core product and removing features that could compromise privacy and security​.

    Reddit users also had mixed reactions. Some users understood the decision and saw it as a necessary step to ensure the survival of Mullvad and the privacy it offers. They criticized those who had abused the feature for ruining it for others​2​. Others, however, were skeptical about the effect of the decision on Mullvad’s future, with some predicting that the removal of port forwarding might lead to the end of the VPN provider. They argued that many users chose Mullvad specifically for the port forwarding feature, and that the removal of this feature could cause these users to leave​2​. Some users also suggested that abuse of the service went beyond torrents and included illegal activities like child sexual abuse material (csam) sharing​.

    The sentiment in the Hacker News thread about Mullvad’s decision to remove port forwarding was mixed. Many users expressed understanding and agreement with the decision, seeing it as a necessary measure to maintain service quality and reduce abuse. However, a significant number of users were disappointed, viewing port forwarding as a crucial feature whose removal could affect their experience, particularly for tasks like torrenting. Suggestions were made for alternative solutions, like offering dedicated servers for port forwarding or implementing stricter controls. Some users provided technical insights to highlight the importance of port forwarding, while official replies from Mullvad indicated that this decision was part of a larger strategic roadmap.

    In short, public sentiment towards Mullvad’s decision to remove support for port forwarding is mixed, with some users understanding and supporting the decision, and others criticizing it and expressing concerns about its impact on the service.

    As of now, Mullvad has removed the ability to add new port forwards and plans to remove all existing ports by July 1, 2023. This decision is sure to be felt by users who are actively using this feature. Mullvad has advised those affected to update their services accordingly.

    This development highlights the ever-present tension between security and functionality in the world of digital services. While Mullvad’s decision may limit certain users, it could also be seen as a necessary step to curb abuse and protect the wider user base. As always, the world of cybersecurity and privacy evolves, and providers like Mullvad must continue to navigate these complex waters.

    See also:

  • ZenMate Users Migrate to CyberGhost Under Kape Technologies Ownership

    ZenMate Users Migrate to CyberGhost Under Kape Technologies Ownership

    In a significant move in the world of online privacy and security,ZenMate, a VPN service founded by two German entrepreneurs with a vision of making the internet a safer place for everyone, has partnered with CyberGhost VPN, another renowned VPN provider also hailing from Germany​. The partnership, slated to provide ZenMate subscribers with numerous benefits including access to more server locations, higher connection speeds, and more encryption protocols, signifies a new chapter in the journey of these two brands towards enhanced user experience and service quality​.

    However, the transition is not without its complexities. The ZenMate apps will be supported only until May 1st, 2023, after which all ZenMate paying subscribers will need to log into a CyberGhost VPN app to access their VPN service. Nevertheless, ZenMate assures that it will continue to manage its subscribers’ paid subscriptions and handle all customer support inquiries​.

    The collaboration between ZenMate and CyberGhost may not come as a surprise to those familiar with the recent trends in the VPN industry, as both these entities are part of the extensive portfolio of Kape Technologies, a prominent player in today’s global VPN market with ownership of several widely used VPN services boasting around 6 million users combined​.

    Kape Technologies, previously known as Crossrider, has been in operation since 2011 and has been steadily shifting its focus towards cybersecurity, culminating in a series of high-profile acquisitions in recent years​. CyberGhost was acquired by Crossrider, now Kape Technologies, in 2017 for $10.4 million, and a year later, ZenMate was acquired for $5.5 million. Following these acquisitions, Kape Technologies announced that both CyberGhost and ZenMate would remain two distinct business entities​.

    Kape Technologies’ aggressive expansion and its origins have sparked controversy. The company was initially focused on “the provision of Web browsers and advertising technology” and was associated with practices that were in direct conflict with the privacy ethos of VPN services. Crossrider, Kape’s previous incarnation, was reported by Microsoft, Trend Micro, and Malwarebytes to have been involved in practices such as browser hijacking and adware distribution​.

    Critics of Kape Technologies argue that these past transgressions cast a shadow over the trustworthiness of the VPN services it now owns. Attempts to separate the VPN services from their parent company by not mentioning Kape Technologies in their Terms of Use have been seen by some as efforts to hide their corporate background​.

    This trend of VPN providers being bought out by tech conglomerates such as Kape Technologies raises concerns about the future of online privacy. VPNs are trusted by users to protect their privacy and secure their data. When these services are owned by conglomerates with checkered pasts or conflicting business interests, it can create skepticism among users regarding how well their privacy is truly being safeguarded.

    While some VPN services like Private Internet Access have remained committed to their principles even after being acquired by Kape Technologies, the opacity surrounding these acquisitions and the changes that follow them are problematic. The VPN industry, founded on the principles of transparency, privacy, and user empowerment, must ensure that these values are upheld even in the face of corporate acquisitions and market consolidation.

    Guilty by association

    Given the profound significance of trustworthiness in the VPN industry, it is worthwhile to consider the affiliations of those at the helm of these corporations. One such key individual is Simon Specka, co-founder of ZenMate, who is also associated with 3CC Partners and Casavo – both of which have faced a fair share of controversies.

    3CC Partners, a real estate investment firm, was involved in litigation with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2019, facing allegations of false and misleading statements to investors. The SEC claimed that 3CC Partners had overstated asset values and concealed material risks to its investors. Despite settling the lawsuit without accepting or denying any wrongdoing, this incident marred the reputation of 3CC Partners.

    Furthermore, in 2020, 3CC Partners was embroiled in another lawsuit filed by a group of investors accusing the company of fraudulent behavior and breach of contract. The disgruntled investors claimed that their funds, meant for real estate investments, had been diverted for other purposes – a charge that 3CC Partners staunchly denied.

    In addition to 3CC Partners, Casavo has faced its own set of challenges. The company has been the subject of numerous complaints about high-pressure sales tactics and a lack of transparency. Furthermore, Casavo has been caught up in several legal battles, including a lawsuit by a former employee who alleged wrongful termination, and an investigation by the New York Attorney General’s office for possible violations of consumer protection laws.

    One cannot help but question the implications of these controversies surrounding Simon Specka, co-founder of ZenMate. As trust and integrity are paramount in the VPN industry, the affiliations of its leaders can significantly influence consumer perception and confidence. While these are merely allegations, and both 3CC Partners and Casavo deny any wrongdoing, these controversies certainly cast a shadow on their business practices.

    The integrity of VPN providers is essential as they are entrusted with the protection of users’ privacy and data. The involvement of leaders in controversies related to other business interests could lead to increased skepticism. This skepticism could impact the trust users place in their VPN services, underscoring the need for transparency and integrity in this industry.

    As VPN users, it’s crucial to remain informed about the affiliations and actions of those in charge of the services that protect our privacy online. In doing so, we can make informed decisions about which services best align with our values and expectations for online privacy and security.

    See also:

  • Brave Browser Aims to Raise the Bar on Privacy with Proposed ‘Off the Record’ Mode

    Brave Browser Aims to Raise the Bar on Privacy with Proposed ‘Off the Record’ Mode

    In a significant stride towards enhancing user privacy, Brave browser has introduced a new feature called “Request Off the Record” (OTR) starting from version 1.53. This feature, designed to protect the privacy needs of individual users, is particularly beneficial for those who need to conceal their browsing behavior from others who have access to their devices.

    The OTR feature allows websites to label their content as “sensitive”. The browser then prompts the user to visit the site in OTR mode, where the site is accessed in a clean, temporary storage area. Notably, sites visited in OTR mode are not saved to the user’s browsing history, and any cookies, permissions, or other site data do not persist to disk. Meanwhile, other sites visited are stored and treated as normal, obscuring any “unusual” behavior to anyone who may access the device later.

    Brave’s current private mode already prevents saving data to the browser’s history, encrypts connections, and deletes cookies and temporary website data after closing. However, tech-savvy users point out this offers limited protection against local network observers who could still monitor unencrypted network traffic. Brave’s proposed ‘Off the Record’ mode aims to resolve this issue by preventing any browsing data from being saved at all during the session through a privacy mechanism called ‘ephemeral storage.’

    Ephemeral storage is similar to encrypted virtual machines that leave no trace once shut down. Brave would run a separate ephemeral profile in the background that gets destroyed when the mode is exited, leaving no evidence or artifacts behind on the device storage. According to Brave, this goes beyond most browsers’ private or incognito modes and could appeal to users with an acute need for confidentiality when browsing.

    Brave’s OTR feature is a part of its suite of features that support the privacy needs of users, providing protection far beyond the “standard” threats typically watched out for by browsers. Brave plans to collaborate with other browser vendors to standardize OTR, ensuring privacy and safety for at-risk browser users across the web, irrespective of the browser they use.

    The development of this feature involved input from several civil society and victim advocacy groups. Mallory Knodel, the CTO at the Center for Democracy and Technology, praised Brave’s attention to detail with OTR Mode, stating that it is an important privacy innovation that can protect users in “attacker you know” situations or anyone who wants more control over what their browser remembers and what it doesn’t.

    However, it is important to note that while Brave’s Request OTR feature prevents visits to sensitive sites from being recorded in a user’s browser history, it does not protect users from other software on their computer that might record information about what sites they visit. Examples include browser extensions, network spying, malware or spyware installed on the device, information saved by sites before or after you visit the “off the record” site, operating-system level logging, and crash logs.

    Brave is set to release Request Off the Record in the upcoming version 1.53 of its desktop browser, with an Android version following in the 1.54 release. The company is also working with experts and researchers at George Washington University and Paderborn University to evaluate how Request-OTR is understood by users and how they can further convey to users exactly what protections the feature does and does not provide. Furthermore, Brave is interested in working with other browsers, organizations, and web companies to potentially standardize Request-OTR, so that users of other websites and browsers can benefit from the protection.

    See also:

  • IVPN Infrastructure Audit Concludes

    IVPN Infrastructure Audit Concludes

    In a significant move towards bolstering user security, IVPN, a leading VPN provider, recently concluded an independent security audit of its new gateway infrastructure. The audit, conducted by the renowned cybersecurity firm Cure53, scrutinized the VPN gateway servers that IVPN had upgraded to a major new OS version. This upgrade included numerous configuration changes, making the audit a critical step before deploying the servers for customer use.

    Over six days in February 2023, two senior members from Cure53 meticulously examined the VPN gateway server and the VPN server OS setup. Their white-box approach, which provided them access to IVPN’s public and private Github code repositories, ensured a thorough and comprehensive audit. However, it’s important to note that no access to production VPN servers or infrastructure was granted, maintaining the integrity of the audit process.

    The audit report, available here, revealed three security vulnerabilities and five miscellaneous issues. These ranged from a world-readable config template revealing an API key to weak user-passwords on Linux that could be easily cracked. While these findings might raise eyebrows, it’s crucial to understand that the purpose of such audits is to identify and rectify potential vulnerabilities before they can be exploited.

    Detailed Findings

    The audit revealed several vulnerabilities and areas of improvement in IVPN’s infrastructure. These findings are critical in understanding the current state of IVPN’s security and the steps that need to be taken to enhance it.

    1. World-readable config template revealing an API key (Page 5): The audit found a world-readable config template that revealed an API key. This poses a significant security risk as it could potentially allow unauthorized access to sensitive data or systems.
    2. Invalid DNS response crashing dnsfilter (Page 6): The audit discovered that an invalid DNS response could crash the dnsfilter. This could potentially lead to a Denial of Service (DoS) attack, disrupting the service for users.
    3. Outdated Go dependencies with known vulnerabilities (Page 7-8): The audit found that some of the third-party dependencies linked to the tested Go applications were outdated and had known vulnerabilities. While these vulnerabilities did not directly impact the security of the tested applications, they could potentially pose a risk in the future, especially if new features are added.
    4. Files of deploy user being overwritten (Page 9): The audit found that files owned by the deploy user could be overwritten. This could potentially lead to a minor Denial of Service (DoS) attack.
    5. Secret keys present in Git repositories (Page 10): The audit discovered that the go-services repository contained secret API keys used to process Bitcoin payments. Storing secrets alongside the source code poses a significant security risk.
    6. Script not owned by root executed as root (Page 10): The audit found that a shell script not owned by the root user could be executed with elevated privileges. This could potentially allow an attacker to escalate privileges.
    7. Weak user-passwords on Linux that can be easily cracked (Page 11): The audit found that one password could be broken in a relatively quick manner. Weak passwords pose a significant security risk as they can be easily cracked, potentially allowing unauthorized access to systems.
    8. Su command that can be used by anyone (Page 12): The audit found that the su command could be used by anyone. This could potentially assist an attacker in escalating privileges.

    These findings underscore the importance of regular security audits. They not only help identify vulnerabilities but also provide actionable insights to enhance the security of the system. It is crucial for VPN providers like IVPN to address these issues promptly to ensure the security and privacy of their users.

    IVPN swiftly remediated all identified issues, demonstrating their commitment to user security. The company is now planning to upgrade their infrastructure with the new configuration, further enhancing the security of their services.

    This audit underscores the importance of regular security audits for VPNs. VPNs are trusted by users worldwide to protect their privacy and secure their data. However, they are not impervious to vulnerabilities. Regular audits help identify potential weaknesses and ensure that VPN providers maintain the highest security standards. They also foster transparency, allowing users to make informed decisions about the services they choose to trust with their data.

    IVPN’s commitment to annual security audits sets a commendable example for other VPN providers. As the company stated in their blog post, “extensive regular audits are necessary to ensure our customer’s security and continued trust.” This sentiment should be echoed across the industry, as maintaining user trust and security should always be paramount.

    In conclusion, while the audit did uncover several issues, the swift remediation of these vulnerabilities highlights IVPN’s dedication to user security. The company’s commitment to transparency and regular audits should serve as a model for other VPN providers, emphasizing the importance of these practices in maintaining user trust and security in the digital age.

    See also: