How realistic and safe is it to create your own VPN for complete anonymous browsing
Think about this. How do you achieve anonymity through a VPN
By having dozens or hundreds of other users on the same VPN server as you.
If you’re the only person using the VPN server, it’s pretty easy to figure out who you are.
Yes, your data from your device to the VPN server will be encrypted from end to end. BUT at the VPN end, that data is unencrypted and sent over the internet to its destination.
So if authorities see a cyber attack from an unknown VPN server, they might ask who was communicating with that server at that time. Oh, it’s just Jim down the street. He’s the only one who ever connected to that bad VPN server. It’s him
@Dakotah
So basically don’t be the only one using the VPN. Making it public or running a legit service could solve that.
Keegan said:
@Dakotah
So basically don’t be the only one using the VPN. Making it public or running a legit service could solve that.
That could expose you to vulnerabilities, especially if you’re creating a free public service.
I’d just use Mullvad VPN, and you’ll be anonymous enough. If you’re thinking about black hat activities, one bit of advice for you is to hope you’re more skilled than whoever you are hacking and all the law enforcement involved.
That could expose you to vulnerabilities, especially if you’re creating a free public service.
If you own the VPN node, I believe legally you would be responsible for the actions of everyone using your service. It’s like if you let your neighbor use your Wi-Fi and they decide to torrent illegal stuff.
If you own the VPN node, I believe legally you would be responsible for the actions of everyone using your service. It’s like if you let your neighbor use your Wi-Fi and they decide to torrent illegal stuff.
Actually, no. That’s not how it works. Neither the VPN nor your neighbor using your Wi-Fi can hold you liable.
A VPN service provider is only hosting transitory digital network communications and has no liability for their users actions while using their network for the most part. The DMCA has clear guidelines about this, and it’s also settled case law since the days of BBSes.
The same is true for someone using your Wi-Fi to do illegal stuff. It’s on law enforcement to collect evidence against a specific person for any illegal activity. Otherwise, the case can be thrown out since you can’t prosecute an entire household.
That said, it hasn’t stopped law enforcement or prosecutors from going after the wrong people in the past. So to be safe, encrypt your Wi-Fi, haha.
FYI: The real problem is that even though arguing that they have no evidence showing you specifically committed any crime can be effective, prosecutors have too much power and can place innocent people in tough positions where it’s safer to take a plea deal instead of risking everything by going to court.
prosecutors have too much power and can put completely innocent people in impossible positions
This is also known as corruption
Paris said:
@Asher
prosecutors have too much power and can put completely innocent people in impossible positions
This is also known as corruption
No, this isn’t corruption. It’s a side effect of an adversarial court system where prosecutors advance in their careers based on wins. It creates an incentive to push as many cases as possible regardless of whether they’re really doing what’s best for society.
Corruption would be a prosecutor taking bribes to go after specific individuals or businesses. You could argue that the MPAA and RIAA lobbying influences local prosecutors through campaign funding but those cases are rare. Generally speaking, I think prosecutors often pursue easy targets instead of carefully considering the cases.
a perverse incentive to prosecute as many people as possible regardless of whether or not it’s ‘worth it’ from a societal perspective
That’s corruption, dude.
Corruption isn’t just about bribes, it comes in many forms. You mentioned one as an argument against corruption. What the heck
@Asher
This is known as the deterioration of our rights. There’s a change happening to finally view this as unconstitutional actions. They took oaths to protect and preserve our constitutional rights, and they’re not doing that. Everyone still has the right to plead their case before a judge. You can stand there telling the prosecutor to go away and refuse to give up your rights. They count on the general public not knowing they have that right to plead before a judge. They will walk all over you. Don’t answer any questions outside of a courtroom, don’t believe any word unless you saw them sworn in. They will lie to make you respond and use that against you. Our court system isn’t focused on the truth; it’s about reasonable doubt.
@Asher
Anyway, what I originally replied to is most certainly an example of corruption. Although it could happen accidentally. If this is intentional, then it’s corruption for sure. Putting an innocent person in jail due to an imbalance of power is literally what corruption is.
@Asher
Bringing this back. What do you think about the Telegram CEO’s arrest in France. What’s your take on the current situation in this area? How can they legally charge him for what others do
@Asher
In Florida, someone anchored their sailboat offshore and connected to someone else’s Wi-Fi to download illegal stuff. The prosecution treated the homeowner as the guilty party.
@Asher
What’s a BSS
Foster said:
@Asher
What’s a BSS
BSS means Bullshit System Service
…but I think you meant to ask what a BBS is: Bulletin Board System. It’s what we used before the internet to connect and share information with each other. And also lots of porn. Slow porn where you’d start seeing a face, then breasts after some time. Eventually, you’d find out it’s just a girl in a bikini because someone thought it would be funny to upload that.
@Asher
And it’s only getting stricter as time goes on
@Merritt
Depends on the laws where that server is based and if that country extradites to the country violated.
Certain individuals can run a controlled TOR node in a country that doesn’t extradite. Better than any VPN and not subject to subpoenas either.
@Merritt
I’m pretty sure you aren’t responsible for what others do on your Wi-Fi network. At least in the US.
Kelley said:
@Merritt
I’m pretty sure you aren’t responsible for what others do on your Wi-Fi network. At least in the US.
Incorrect.
Within your local network, you don’t have any liability because you can’t harm anyone else.
If your friend comes over and torrents movies, you are responsible. You signed an agreement with your ISP about what you would do with your internet connection, and illegal activities were likely in that contract. Your ISP won’t care who did it; they just see your account breaking the rules.
How could you not be liable? Are you saying if someone maliciously uses your Wi-Fi without your knowledge? Maybe, but it would probably be up to you to prove that
@Bret
Breaking the terms of use is not the same as legal liability, which is what I’m talking about. There have been many court cases in the US establishing that an IP address isn’t enough to prove liability.