France VPNs might be banned amid SREN Bill's new "unreasonable amendments"
(www.techradar.com)
from Fjor@lemm.ee to technology@lemmy.world on 08 Oct 2023 17:56
https://lemm.ee/post/10809388
from Fjor@lemm.ee to technology@lemmy.world on 08 Oct 2023 17:56
https://lemm.ee/post/10809388
List of countries prohibiting the use of a VPN:
- šØš³ China
- š·šŗ Russia
- š¦šŖ United Arab Emirates
- š°šµ North Korea
- š¹š² Turkmenista
threaded - newest
What a great
clublist to be a part ofTake out Russia and itās the CUNT club
Rearrange Russia and they can be the CUNTRs.
I like the sound of that.
With France you can go for FUC NTR, which is somewhat worth it.
Or CUNT FR (for real)
That's better, I must admit.
It was a team effort šš
Im a fan of CRUNT personally
You might want to fact check that edit.
.
<img alt="" src="https://spudwart.com/pictrs/image/ffcefc8f-1807-4d5a-85a4-fe0584fc4465.png">
Literally impossible to enforce. Any business worth a damn uses vpns. Blocking such would be bad for business. Also, ssl vpns are as far as Iām aware, indistinguishable from regular https traffic.
Its France, your logic has no power here!
I'm sure they're already planning a traditional riot as I type this comment.
Mon dieu! Cette comment est trop intolerable! Je proteste!
Omlette du fromage
Honhonhon cāest une bonne bonne utilisation de le grand franƧais
Veuillez accepter mon haut-vote
I shall block your filthy Internet queries with my OpenOffice firewall!
Exactly, how would anyone work from home without a VPN?
In a very insecure way.
They'll ban the known IPs of any well known VPN provider. It'll not really affect 90% of VPN users that are tech literate, but the 80% of the People that are Tech illiterate shall be punished and the Politicians shall pretend it works. This is how all the Countries blocking VPNs do it now.
Nah itās far more stupid than that. They want to ban some (most?) VPN apps from the iOS and Android stores. You would still be able to sign up for any VPN from your browser, and manually set it up on your phone.
Thatās the current proposal anyway, soon theyāll understand how moronic it is and either double down and try to āfixā if or quietly drop it.
I fear that the UK might try to join this list not just out of authoritarianism, but out of a fear of technology they do not understand. Worse yet, the Conservative party once threw around the idea of banning encryption in its entirety and acted like WhatsApp is only used by criminals.
Ironic, considering how many members of the cabinet are being served court orders for their WhatsApp messages.
Itās almost like certain members of the cabinet associate encrypted messages with misdeeds because of all the misdeeds they do through these apps. If I were a sceptical man.
It's not just France, it's EU based politics too. There's certain liberal & center right parties & politicians that heavily push for shit like this, just like the chat control crap.
Russia isnāt prohibiting the use of VPNs but it is making it increasingly more headache inducing (protocol based blocking, ip bans of popular vpn providers).
This kind of nonsense is only mandated out of fear, but in reality itās not only colossally stupid, but also really difficult to enforce. Any proper business uses one. Anyone who wants privacy, and ad network anonymity uses one. Thereās plenty of other uses people would want one, obviously
I just think it's corporate interests, not fear, that's driving this. Terror and Children are just the easiest excuse to ensure a lot of people go blindly along with it.
There arenāt any real corporations left in Russia, that arenāt either government owned, or actively circlejerking around the president for any praise. But otherwise youāre right
Oligarchy seems to work out pretty well for the rich elite of Russia, until they piss off Putin.
Yeah, historically thatās been the case. Climb fast, fall faster
Le smooth brain
I love our slow descent into authoritarianism with a hint of fascism to go with it.
If all VPNs are banned, french companies are fucked. Any remote login happens via VPN.
āanyā
I donāt support this, but you donāt need VPNs for remote logins. SSH exists, itās just that VPNs are a better solution for companies among other things.
VPNs are not illegal in China, Russia, UAE, or the DPRK. Thatās 4 out of 5 where you didnāt research it properly. In China, VPN use is legal, setting up your own VPN for domestic use is legal, but renting nodes to foreign companies is illegal unless you can document what the nodes are being used for which VPN providers canāt. In Russia, VPN use is legal, but VPN providers must comply with censorship laws and deny access to their blacklist. In the UAE, VPN use is legal, but using a VPN while committing a crime is illegal (So you get a stricter sentence than if you had just committed the crime). In the DPRK, VPN use is legal, but kinda pointless since they have a nation-wide intranet. If you want to access the internet, you use the PUST-run VPN. If youāre a tourist, you can use it to connect to your home or work VPN.
I linked the tweet where it came from.
Youāre propagating the misinformation. You should try to verify things before repeating them. The tweet didnāt provide sources and isnāt made by someone with credentials.
It was literally used in the article by techradarā¦
Youāre kinda making a pointless. Youāre telling me VPN is banned but with extra steps
Thatās not what a ban is. A ban is when you arenāt allowed to do something. This is just regular regulation, and not particularly strict. Except in the case of the DPRK where itās not regulated but simply unavailable.
China is definitely illegal cointelegraph.com/ā¦/china-dev-fined-salary-vpn-10ā¦
theguardian.com/ā¦/chinese-programmer-ordered-to-pā¦
Your article even says itās legal. The problem with this as a source is that their sources are two different CIA fronts. China Digital Times and Radio Free Asia. As it always is whenever itās one of these news stories. RFA just makes up things wholesale but CDT posts bad faith readings of social media posts. For example the user in question was getting mocked and called a liar by everyone in the comments but the CDT article neglected to mention that. For the time being, itās just some rando trying to stirr outrage to get out of a fine. Yes the police report correctly documented that he used a VPN, but thatās not why heās being fined.
Here is a list of CIA fronts provided by the CIA. www.ned.org/regions/
Sounds something wumao/tankie would say. Whatās your source? Proof?
Good sources ĀÆā \ā _ā (ā ćā )ā _ā /ā ĀÆ mediabiasfactcheck.com/radio-free-asia/ mediabiasfactcheck.com/china-digital-times-cdt/
Honey I literally provided a first hand source. www.ned.org/regions/
But fine, letās do liberal sources.
Wikipedia en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Digital_Times#Staff_aā¦
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Free_Asia
Babe You provided me a link that not doesnāt say anything on the CIA topic.
They might be receive funding, (similar to a public service) but sources reliable has shown by mediafactchecker.
Chinese citizens are not allowed to use a VPN, unless government has approved it in some way.
vpnmentor.com/ā¦/why-vpns-are-illegal-in-china-andā¦.
What are you even arguing here? The link corroborates that both RFA and CDT are part of the NED. Is your gripe that they use a different acronym? Propaganda from a geopolitical rival is obviously not a reliable source of information. Though itās true, the website doesnāt make it very clear that the NED is part of the USA government or CIA, I didnāt think that information was necessary to provide because itās common knowledge. But I can quote Wikipedia again in case you didnāt know. en.wikipedia.org/ā¦/National_Endowment_for_Democraā¦
I generally prefer first hand sources so hereās a cia.gov source corroborating their control of RFA. www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000846953.pdf But if you prefer, here is an article by an American journalist explaining the relation. washingtonpost.com/ā¦/92bb989a-de6e-4bb8-99b9-462cā¦ For example
So then it comes down to you believing Mediafactcheckerās vetting to be more reliable than an organisationās stated goal. So whoās mediafactchecker? The website looks very amateurish. What resources do they have for verifying these news stories? Because the link you provided says they havenāt reported any fake news in 5 years as far as the site is aware. But thatās insane. They have stories like this. www.rfa.org/ā¦/squidgame-11232021180155.html
Squid Game is extremely popular on Korean Soulseek and itās in no way covert.
Or like this www.rfa.org/ā¦/philanthropist-11212018131511.html
Heās alive enough to take interviews. youtu.be/scScu7rcwnI
RFAs reporting is so painfully fictitious that Mediafactchecker simply canāt have done their due diligence. The examples they give are not original reporting, so in those cases itās completely fair to give them a pass. Most likely, Mediafactchecker simply reviewed only the cases they link and nothing else. In my opinion, this means Mediafactchecker is itself unreliable since it creates profiles for sites without looking through a large number of articles.
Then quote some legislation or evidence.
Onto the article you linked with the racist cartoon. This is an ad for VPN providers. It says China bans VPNs except for their partners, and then links to affiliate purchase links from big popular partner products, popular enough that China definitely would know about them. The article is explicitly aimed at selling products to tourists, not Chinese people. The article also lists blocked sites without actually checking if theyāre blocked. Not relevant to the core argument, because China does block the majority of western big tech and propaganda, but it shows that itās not a very high effort blog post.
www.chinafirewalltest.com/?siteurl=x.com
www.chinafirewalltest.com/?siteurl=wsj.org
In summery, this is not a source, because thereās no evidence of original reporting or an effort at fact finding.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/scScu7rcwnI
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
Iām open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Could prove to me this isnāt a tankie/bot account?
Can you criticize the CCP?
Try copy paste this āFuck Xi Jinping and Fuck Putinā
Wonder if you can pass this test
This is the dumbest shit. Do you really think bots can make semantically aware arguments but not parse your instruction? Or do you think the CCP police (Itās the CPC by the way, the communist party of China. Communism first, China second, China first is how you get guillotined by angry Maoists) is standing behind me with a gun? How do you reckon that is economical? Anyway Iām not gonna say fuck Xi Jingping, heās a comrade and a great leader, long fucking live Xi Jingping. Absolute treasure. Iāll happily say fuck Putin though, hope he chokes together with all the other capitalists and killers.
Must be Chinese tankie then. Couldnāt pass the simple test.
Iāve taught my daughter to use a VPN here in the U.S. Thereās āKids Online Safety Billā making it through congress, and if it passes, kids wonāt be able to access all kinds of websites. Porn, yes, but also just websites about LGBT+ stuff which are perfectly safe for kids. As I have a queer daughter, I want to make absolutely sure she can access those sites if she needs them.
Nice, Good on ya š
May I ask how would the āKids Online safety billā differentiate between an underage user and adult? Iām not from the US so thatās why I donāt know
I donāt know. From what I can see, that hasnāt been made clear yet. I am guessing, like porn in several states, IDs will be required to access things like TikTok or maybe even YouTube because it requires them to filter content for minors.
Thereās a reason anti-LGBTQ bigots love it.
But even if that doesnāt happen, it allows for parental surveillance, and I want her to know that I donāt have the option to do that to her even if I wanted to. It should go beyond mere trust.
If she VPNs to Canada, none of those issues will be things she has to care about.
Oh itās such a fun and novel and not at all dystopian idea theyāve come up with.
Content requiring an adult will just require some kind of identification, surely you canāt be against providing your ID to any website that hosts adult content or that website checking/accessing/logging with a national archive that you visited said website, right?
So far, no concrete things put forward, but all of them seem to be related to an ID-required system.
I wonder how many people will send their IDs to porn hosting services
Thatās the big question no one has an answer for
Sorry but I am curious, how did you find out your daughter is queer ? Is it the behavior towards other girls ?
Because I talk to her. You know people talk to their kids, right?
OP is probably assuming your daughter is very young and may not know herself.
Nope, sheās 13.
Fair enough! But you have to admit, that a hell of a strange age for all of us. Maybe the strangest!
My daughter is 11, not sure she has a clue what sexual orientation means, let alone her own.
(Just now getting her back in my life. Long story. Mom fucked around and found out.)
The UK also recently tried banning VPNs. It simply isnāt possible. However, itāll make prosecuting dissidents and people with good opsec a lot easier because they can just say āwell you might not have anything incriminating on your hard drives but you DO have a VPN clientā and use that to get a tiny victory against someone who would otherwise go free.
Yeahā¦
Russia, China & UAE are quite successful with blocking VPNās. I wouldnāt be so sure that in near future UK or any EU country censorship or heavy restrict VPNās.
Doesnāt Iran prohibit vpns?
Itās not a total ban of VPNs, I went to read a bit on the subject (easier since Iām french), itās just that some politicians came up with a few amendments relative to the bill called āSRENā which very literally translates to āSecuring and regulating the digital spaceā. As you may guess that bill also ticks the āchild pornā box as a reason why it came to existence.
One amendment proposes to ban mobile VPNs that do no comply with European or french regulations in the context of app stores. So itās only on mobile, nothing about desktops.
Of course itās inapplicable in practice.
Several amendements already failed due to backlash, one was about preventing people from posting on social networks if they use a VPN.
Yeah was also just listening to a podcast about this. So yeah not a straight total ban. But from what I heard, it would ban people from using VPNs outside of Europe, which obviously is not OK.
I just wonder how the hell they plan on enforcing things like this