Two US Lawmakers Urge Immediate Action Curtailing Deceptive Data Practices in VPN Industry (theverge.com) 48
Two members of the U.S. Congress urged America's Federal Trade Commission "to address deceptive practices in the Virtual Private Network industry," reports the Verge:
With abortion becoming illegal or restricted in several states, more people are looking to conceal their messages and search history, as police can use this information to prosecute someone seeking the procedure. In their letter, Anna Eshoo (D-CA) and Senator Ron Wyden ask the FTC to clamp down on VPN providers that engage in deceptive advertising, or make false assertions about the range of their service's privacy. The lawmakers cite research from Consumer Reports that indicate 75 percent of the most popular VPNs "misrepresented their products" or made misleading claims that could give "abortion-seekers a false sense of security." Eshoo and Wyden also call attention to reports accusing various VPN services of misusing user data, as well as "a lack of practical tools or independent research to audit VPN providers' security claims...."
"We urge the Federal Trade Commission to take immediate action... to curtail abusive and deceptive data practices in companies providing VPN services to protect internet users seeking abortions." Eshoo and Wyden also ask that the FTC develop a brochure that informs anyone seeking an abortion about online privacy, as well as outlines the risks and benefits of using a VPN.
"We urge the Federal Trade Commission to take immediate action... to curtail abusive and deceptive data practices in companies providing VPN services to protect internet users seeking abortions." Eshoo and Wyden also ask that the FTC develop a brochure that informs anyone seeking an abortion about online privacy, as well as outlines the risks and benefits of using a VPN.
I had questions about VPN from non-tech family (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. What I do on such requests is to recommend the Tor browser or Tails _and_ carefully reading their documentation on how to stay anonymous. Unless you need high bandwidth, there is really no need to pay for VPN (but donate to Tor if you find it useful), and Tor routinely gets their security tested by China, Russia and all the other repressive states (which now include the US, I guess).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends. Basically only if all 3 (regular web connection) or all 6 (TOR network) nodes are compromised by the same or cooperating attackers.
P stands for Private in VPN (Score:2)
So banning abortion is what it takes (Score:1)
So banning abortion is what it takes for the US to start taking privacy seriously.
Re:So banning abortion is what it takes (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. In a twist of irony, no longer recognizing the right to privacy about one's medical procedures now makes Congress recognize the need for real privacy in everything else.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yep! And another wonderful thing about this abortion law: maybe all those Californicators will think twice about moving to my state where abortion is 100% illegal now!
More unwanted children will surely make your state better and safer. Good job LOL.
Re: (Score:3)
More maladjusted kids to keep the prison industrial complex running. But for that we're gonna need to keep tabs on them.
Fortunately we have JUST the supreme court for the task. That ol' contraception failure to prison pipeline will be running smooth in no time. And if we do it right, we can snare mom in the trap too.
Re: (Score:1)
People stopped wanting to move to your shit state after February 2021.
Re: (Score:2)
Americans Will Get to Learn What Tor is Meant For (Score:5, Insightful)
Tor was built to allow people to communicate in countries where oppressive governments persecuted people for doing things considered a human right in civilized places. It's ironic that Americans will finally learn the real/original purpose of Tor was this, and not criminal activities, when they make decisions their citizens make on what to do with their own body, a criminal activity.
Re: (Score:2)
Tor was built to allow people to communicate in countries where oppressive governments persecuted people for doing things considered a human right in civilized places. It's ironic that Americans will finally learn the real/original purpose of Tor was this, and not criminal activities, when they make decisions their citizens make on what to do with their own body, a criminal activity.
Also, while you are learning to use TOR and/or VPN for everything, also take the time to encrypt your cell phone.
https://medium.com/@Kendra_Ser... [medium.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Also, while you are learning to use TOR and/or VPN for everything, also take the time to encrypt your cell phone.
I have to say I am conflicted about that. I think at this time you should not trust your phone with anything sensitive (may include location) because you cannot reliably secure it.
Not the real target (Score:2, Interesting)
Second: A pregnant woman using a VPN for seeking an Abortion in the US is now taking just as much of a risk as a journalist using a VPN for whistle-blowing under a totalitarian regime. Or any other internet use deemed illegal by the government. The government will attempt to hunt you down if it finds out. The risk does not come from the use of a VPN, it comes from the tyrannical U
Re: (Score:2)
Flawed premise (Score:2, Interesting)
There is, thus far, 0 evidence that someone can be prosecuted for going to another state for a medical procedure which is legal in the receiving state. While I am under no such illusions that there won't be a republican out there, somewhere, who tries to make it so, the fact is that it will fail.
So let's tone down the rhetoric a bit, it doesn't do anyone any good.
Re:Flawed premise (Score:5, Insightful)
Multiple states are trying to enact "private individuals can sue other private individuals who aid someone in having an abortion" legislation (Missouri for example), including suing the out of state doctor who performs said abortion.
So yeah, it's not rhetoric, it's planning for a situation which many states are trying to actually create.
The US no longer functions as a country, it's literally at political war with itself right now. It's not often you see a rich, developed country take a huge step backward in terms of individuals rights, but here we are watching it happen.
Yes, but it's dumb and will fail (Score:3)
> So yeah, it's not rhetoric, it's planning for a situation
Yes, some dummies are in fact trying something dumb.
It's still dumb and will fail.
> The US no longer functions as a country, it's literally at political war with itself right now.
Very much so. A few years ago it was revealed that Russia was placing ads designed to foment discord in the US. Here's the interesting bit - they were running inflammatory ads on BOTH SIDES of contentious issues. Our enemies don't want to fight the US, they want us to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure what your first sentence was supposed to say since it's - not a sentence. :)
Anyway, despite claims to the contrary, the Texas statute makes no claim to apply outside of Texas. Lat I can see, it's also NOT "still in effect", though that can change from week to week.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
There is, thus far, 0 evidence that someone can be prosecuted for going to another state for a medical procedure which is legal in the receiving state. While I am under no such illusions that there won't be a republican out there, somewhere, who tries to make it so, the fact is that it will fail.
Not sure why you assume it would fail, the American Taliban are in charge now. Nor should you discount the abject misery it will cause to many until/if it does.
If anything I'd expect a increased push towards keeping your women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen the way your dogshit God commands.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So Americans have the same abortion rights as Afghans. Good for you. I'm sure if you make a list of other countries around the world where abortion is illegal you will find
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
the fact is that it will fail
Do you want to base that "fact" on something concrete other thank us taking the word of you internet rando? There are many legal examples of an attempt to circumvent a law being made illegal.
There are also currently bills in place in Missouri, and legal opinions on why the bill will be perfectly enforceable thanks to its use of civil law rather than criminal law, a deceptive tactic well known to republican shitcunts given its recent success on effectively criminalising abortion despite roe v wade still bein
Re: (Score:2)
Why am I not surprised the panicky sheep around here don't understand the constitution and the bill of rights?
Your country was built on the premise that women and colored people were second class. You can talk about words on paper all you want, but it is pretty clear that in the real world that original premise remains.
Re: Flawed premise (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Why am I not surprised the panicky sheep around here don't understand the constitution and the bill of rights?
A few months ago women could get abortions anywhere, now they can't. They don't give a fuck about the bill of rights or constitution. The fact of the matter is their rights were set back.
The only people who complain about why are the abhorrent fuckwits who supported someone having less rights now than they did beforehand.
Take your bill of rights, print it out in A0 and shove it up your fucking arse.
Historic Moment in Privacy and Security (Score:5, Insightful)
The spate of bizarre laws seeking to control pregnant women - which include things like giving bounties to private citizens to "turn in" women seeking abortion services, and with anything from absolute bans to Catch-22 style provisions making any access for any medical reason whatsoever effectively impossible, highlights a fundamental fact about communication security for private citizens.
You cannot give governments "the keys to the kingdom", back-doors or laws that given them access under all circumstances. We have seem law enforcement types whinging for years now how communication encryption, or lack of permanent repositories of all communications, is a terrible burden on police agencies that must be rectified, that no message should be beyond their reach because "criminals" (used to "terrorists" or "drug dealers"). But they never had that at any earlier time.
People need to be protected from government observation, and guns won't do it.
What about? (Score:2)
What about asking the budget of the FTC is increased, the employee count is increased, the cyber-forensics is increased?
What about he admits when he asks for records about customers, corporations have to deliver.
In related news... (Score:1)
Lawmakers urge immediate action on 3rd grade teachers not telling students about irrational numbers. My point being, that you have to educate people, you cannot legislate away ignorance!
TL;DR on the CR study (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
People having an abortion are more than 80% identical to people that have sex that can result in conception. Because in the latter case, about 80% of the time the female body does an abortion by itself on a fertilized egg. Hence anybody having sex that could result in pregnancy really needs to be sent to prison for attempted murder.
In other news, the anti-abortion fanatics are clueless as to how biology works.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty much so. Primitives that mentally never left the caves.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I am not the only one. In fact, this is not my original idea. The thing is that the religiously befuddled usually place the beginning of life at the point the egg gets fertilized. Hence anybody with actual reasoning ability will get to the argument I used sooner or later. Of course, the anti-abortion fanatics cannot get there or they would have to admit how disconnected from reality their arguments are.
Propaganda (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
So asking the wrong question (Score:2)
So, all of the technical expertise in the world doesn't help one bit if the second that a bad warrant comes in they go - oh here is the data on our customer you wanted... doesn't take much - and we have seen how courts issue bad warrants all the time