No, I just switched back to chromium until it is supported
Oh, it’s just that said that you’d prefer that extension so you don’t need to rebuild your own version of the browser, which confused me.
I’m pretty impressed with WireGuard at the moment - I’m trying AzireVPN’s free beta, installed on my main surfing machine, and so far I have nothing but good to say about it. If I could run it on the WAN side of my router to encrypt everything in and out of my LAN, it would be rather heavenly, especially if I could have my ad-blocker and anti-malware at the bridge between LAN and WAN, to keep that stuff away from my machines, in addition to brave as the backstop to catch whatever the adblocker misses.
Has anyone run Brave with an Anonabox yet? Are any of you worried about operating-system level compromises, and if so, are you running versions of Ubuntu to try to prevent that? I’m tired of being in the Deep State panopticon.
You might wanna have a look at this :
ISPs are blocking VPN applications with Deep Packet Inspection(DPI)
all of the above waste, if you add, you must add REAL! VPN
Many VPNs provide obfuscated servers. They often easily circumvent surveillance & firewalls restricting the VPN access.
P.S. what do you exactly mean by a “REAL! VPN”
@BOB-vagene the individual must mean a full force VPN, so one which provides a native standalone proprietary client desktops side rather than browser based.
One other thing @BOB-vagene per your request I removed PureVPN from the above list and one other solution I’m sort of contemplating removing is NordVPN but it has been requested by a number of users and was surprised to see you put it in your recommended list considering this was published by a user above - https://nordvpnspyapp.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/nordvpn-spy-app-censoring-customers.html
What do you think?
Well, most VPNs I mentioned have their own clients for windows & Macs. NordVPN, IPvanish, IVPN & rest I mentioned. However, you’d have to use OpenVPN on Linux machines.
Crap! I just updated the last comment and didn’t realize you’d respond so soon.
Have you had a look at the link, it’s quite long?
Update: Actually @BOB-vagene there are a handful of VPN providers that offer a client or cli based solution where by you don’t have to use the OpenVPN external tool on Linux machines but they’re rare in the market and unfortunately under marketed.
Yes. However, most of the companies the provide clients for Linux, they’ve faces several issues like DNS leak & Sudden disconnect. Onether issue is privacy. The fact that few VPN Applications contained tracker libraries is not a shock. So basically OpenVPN/CLi is the most reliable solution & moreover, it’s actually more easy to use rather then a custom client. If you once learn how use .conf files via CLiprovided by 1 VPN company, then the same method will be used by any other VPN provider via OpenVPN
That blog doesn’t seem soo legit. If some genuine user had complaint against the NordVPN, they would’ve instead published such issue on a forum & stuff rather then just a “nordvpnspy…blog.com”
I mean, I’ve used NordVPN for a long time. I follow the facts & not a blind follower. The best VPN on my list right now is IVPN but again, everyone’s review depends on their location & what speed they get in their respective countries + support desk
@BOB-vagene the DNS leaks are all to common in Linux distros but can be easily remedied with the input of a few commands of which there are plenty of advice from the Linux community.
As for OpenVPN/CLi, the only issue that brings is that behind the scene features are not utilized as in the other OSs and you really can’t tell the user bandwidth on a singular server/node to figure out which server will be the most efficient (ms / %) to use at any given time.
However, I have noticed that it has helped me quite a lot when the native client failed in the past or was less efficient and OpenVPN was surprisingly quick.
All of the extensions aren’t spread that much. Is that some kind of underground software? Why the Giants aren’t used here. Namely, those who’s in on tops of ratings more info
Most (all?) of these “VPN” extensions rely on Chromium’s ability to connect to a HTTP proxy over SSL. (Somewhat confusingly called a “HTTPS” proxy in a suitable PAC file.)
Simply allowing for a proxy to be configured within Brave would already provide a usable solution in most scenario’s.
Regardless, ideally, I hope Brave comes up with a generic way to connect to all these VPN providers and does not opt for including 50+ extensions.
does anyone not see the irony in a discussion about security and privacy of one’s online activities being basically handed to a 3rd party?
Brave is a browser which has kindly included in its code the ability to block maliciousness and intrusiveness to a fairly large extent, but is still customizable. that does not mean that your computer, or especially, your network has the same coverage outside of brave.
@heysoundude it depends on your threat assessment. There are plenty of use-cases where a 3rd-party or self-hosted VPN suffices.
true, but I’m of the perspective that we should all be doing it my way
back to what you said about proxies a few posts ago - are you familiar with the FF extension/add-on decentraleyes? That would be nice to be able to access in Brave, I think…