Groups > comp.os.linux.networking > #3724

Re: virtual vpns

From	William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca>
Newsgroups	comp.os.linux.networking
Subject	Re: virtual vpns
Date	2016-04-27 21:48 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<nfrc2g$sgl$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<nfr4c7$uif$1@dont-email.me> <nfr4ev$urr$1@dont-email.me> <nfr5nk$20o$2@dont-email.me> <nfr6ng$8cb$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

On 2016-04-27, Bill Cunningham <nospam@nspam.invalid> wrote:
>
> "William Unruh" <unruh@invalid.ca> wrote in message 
> news:nfr5nk$20o$2@dont-email.me...
>
>> The problem always is how much do you trust them, and what basis do you
>> have for tristing them. For example they could be run by say NSA or the
>> equivalent in China/russia/....
>
>     Yeah I see what you mean. My fedora has openvpn. I would like to use 
> L2TP which is more secure than openvpn. Trust is the major issue. Would TOR 
> be the better thing to go with. I'm not up to anything it's just that I 
> think I have a right to not be watched. And have frames and payload 
> examined.

Agreed.
Tor is blocked by a lot of places. 
Why do you claim that l2tp is more secure than openvpn? It just provides
the tunnel-- no security.
To see a contrary view
http://www.howtogeek.com/211329/which-is-the-best-vpn-protocol-pptp-vs.-openvpn-vs.-l2tpipsec-vs.-sstp/

Of course they could just be NSA flacks, so you should really use
PTPP:-)

On your side, your ISP knows that you are sending traffic to the vpn. It
does not know what. The VPN provider knows everything since they decrypt
the traffic on their end and know what the traffic is between you and
the other end. They also know what the link is between your address and
the remote address you are connecting to  ( unless you then go through
yet another vpn). 

The problem is not the travelling out of your machine to the vpn server,
but in that vpn server. But that is always the problem. 

>
> Bill
>
>
>

Thread

virtual vpns and XP "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 15:40 -0400
  Re: virtual vpns and XP "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 15:41 -0400
    Re: virtual vpns and XP William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2016-04-27 19:59 +0000
      Re: virtual vpns "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2016-04-27 16:20 -0400
        Re: virtual vpns William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2016-04-27 21:48 +0000
          Re: virtual vpns "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2016-04-28 13:56 -0400
            Re: virtual vpns William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2016-04-28 18:39 +0000
          Re: virtual vpns "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2016-04-28 14:00 -0400
            Re: virtual vpns William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2016-04-28 18:41 +0000
              Re: virtual vpns Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be.invalid> - 2016-04-28 21:18 +0200
            Re: virtual vpns "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@invalid.es> - 2016-04-28 20:56 +0200
  Re: virtual vpns and XP William Unruh <unruh@invalid.ca> - 2016-04-27 19:53 +0000

csiph-web