I don’t know how effective VPNs are over a public WiFi network, but I do know it stopped Spectrum from sending me “you are downloading copyrighted material, stop it” emails once I started using one. Fuck Spectrum, I don’t have them anymore, but that seems like a good enough reason to keep using one in certain circumstances.
They need to advertise a legitimate use for their service.
If they don’t have a threat from public wifi or other security concerns to remedy, then the only purpose for their service is to bypass region limits and block infringement notices. They would be considered complicit in such infringement.
That their service also hinders efforts to stop pirates needs to be an “unintended” and “unavoidable” side effect.
I use Proton when I’m on my university’s campus because they switched to using EDUroam for the campus wifi. I used to be a Sys Admin at a different university a while back, and from what I know, EDUroam allows the IT department to monitor basically all of the traffic over the network. I don’t know exactly how deep that stuff goes, but if I was doing anything personal or sensitive like banking or whatever, I’d flip on the VPN on my personal computer. I also don’t have any personal accounts logged in on the school issued laptop because they have it loaded with institutional spyware. Once I graduate, I’ll blank the drive and reinstall the OS to have a decent Lenovo laptop on hand as a spare.
Edit to add: I use Proton because it was the least shady service that I could get for a reasonable price as a student. It is also helpful for finding textbooks. :)
They can’t decrypt HTTPS unless you installed a certificate controlled by them. The only thing they can know is which domains you visited, but not what you did on it.
There are plenty of legitimate uses for their services, they just aren’t things that the vast majority of people actually need. For example:
- access things in a LAN from a WAN - i.e. access a personal PC when you’re at a friend’s house, and your home LAN is behind CGNAT
- get around local laws - e.g. my state requires ID checks for porn and social media, so getting a VPN one state over gets around that
- prevent ISP from seeing the sites you visit - very valid privacy concern, especially since SNI exists to de-mask TLS packets
There are also some sketchier needs, such as:
- get different content on your streaming platform
- hide sharing of illegal content (i.e. piracy)
- perform illegal transactions (e.g. going on Tor to buy drugs or whatever on the black market)
I think VPNs are trying to appeal to more than just the above needs, they’re trying to create needs to grow their marketshare. That isn’t something a reputable VPN should do, or at least that’s something that would make me hesitate to use a given VPN.
The only thing you need to say is “my ISP uses CGNAT” you can’t host anything or run games for your friends without a way to punch through the CGNAT layer. I mean you could use IPv6 if it weren’t still a joke in the US but here we are.
get around local laws
That’s not a legitimate use; it’s an illegal use just like piracy is.
especially since SNI exists to de-mask TLS packets
ECH will finally fix this. https://blog.cloudflare.com/encrypted-client-hello/
SNI is still better than what we used to have. Before SNI, every site that used TLS or SSL had to have a dedicated IP address.
On public WiFi I just vpn into my home network. The issue with public WiFi is that it can be sniffed by anyone in range since there is generally no encryption.
Although pretty much everything we do is over tls these days, and DoH helps protect against even dns sniffing. There’s still at least some risk to working in the clear over a public WiFi network. At least in information gathering, what bank you use, etc.
But, there’s no real benefit in using a paid vpn over one you own unless you’re downloading illegal content, want to watch another Netflix region, or are in a country with heavy Internet monitoring/filtering.
Possibly the domain is visible with a traffic monitoring tool. Everything else is between you and the bank via HTTPS. Having said that, whatever is not over https is visible to whoever sits on the same network as yourself.
All ISPs are legally obligated to forward that shit to you. The alerts are not from spectrum, they’re just relaying the information.
Right now, copyright owners do not have legal permission to find out who you are directly without a court order. They would only seek that information if they were planning to file a lawsuit.
Media companies know, from the Napster incident, that such actions can backfire stupendously. It’s rare that they even bother anymore. I can go into detail on why, but I’ll leave it out for brevity.
So they send the notice to your ISP, who is legally obligated to match the information on the notice to the subscriber and forward the notice to you.
For many, this goes to an ISP provided mailbox, which most people ignore the existence of it. Clearly spectrum operates differently.
The notices are from copyright holders who have no idea who you are, and can’t determine that information unless they intend to sue you. So those can be, for the most part, ignored.
It’s not your ISPs fault that you got those. They couldn’t give a shit less about what you do on their service, or what you download. They just want you to pay your bill every month and keep the gravy train rolling.
I’m saying fuck Spectrum for other reasons. Either way, there’s less of a trail.
Fair enough. I haven’t used spectrum, so I have no opinion. I’m not in the right country to subscribe to their service, so there’s that.
Have a good day.
