Head of Russia’s Human Rights Council admits banning VPNs is “impossible”
Attempting to block all VPNs would disrupt businesses and banks
The official still condemned citizens using VPNs to access blocked media
Worry not, the bought up or blackmailed politicians in power in Europe and America will still try it.
The next corporate installed dem nominee should have a campaign banner that reads “I work for my donors, not my constituents. Now vote for me, you peasants!”.
Russia has become very good in blocking all kinds of VPN and even obfuscated VPN traffic.
My Russian friend is currently using VLESS to bypass the Deep Packet Inspection and it seems very promising.
It doesn’t work for the West because it relies on hiding behind CDNs like Cloudflare. If the West prohibits VPNs the governments in the West will cooperate with them.
Russia could also catch them by tracking known VPN users. The unpopular CDN urls to which they connect are very likely the VPNs. They can block those connections and observe the reaction. Russia could also just buy the VPN service and know the target servers. Like adblockers for youtube, they accept escapes for the technological advanced to prevent them from taking other actions.
Europe be like… liar we going to try anyway.
Canada too
Orly? You don’t say.
The sooner UK PLC gets this into their thick, ideological skulls the better. 👀
The Government of a country with a centuries-old traditition of keeping the plebes under control and who are currently licking the arse of the modern day version of the NAZIs will never accept that there are technical limitations for their project of detecting and suppressing in the cradle any realistic organised forces for change.
Literally the only time in the last 3 centuries that Britain moved away from the mindset that the upper classes should control the rest was after over a million working class Britons with military training came back from WWII, and by the 80s they were already walking back on the achievements of that period.
If you’d seen the original statement in Russian, you’d realize this person has no idea what they are talking about at all, and with their job title, the purpose of it is just to present some kinda more liberal viewpoint for appearance.
And yes, it’s possible, Iran and North Korea are doing it, and there are plenty of countries with heavy censorship and regulation, and there’s a piece of good engineering advice I once got - “you get to your goal faster if you don’t pick up boss fights”, meaning that while it’s cool for a commenter on the Web to imagine them taking the hardest and most expensive path to solving the problem of censorship and control, they have different choices.
And Utah.
If anything is impossible, it’s Utah having any sense. They started out as a cult, and they still follow it
Iran has switched to intranet and isn’t looking back. They now started selling foreign traffic at ridiculous prices and only to licensed companies, not consumers. Naturally, this created a black market with even more exorbitant prices, but that isn’t really a concern when it stops quite literally 99% of the traffic from reaching outside, and russia has already been planning to cut off foreign traffic as a whole in a similar fashion, except for now they are proposing that ISPs should provide the “internet+” plan to the regular users as well.
All this to say - they aren’t saying “oh well, we can’t block VPNs anyway, so we give up”, they are justifying the upcoming internet blackout, with the best case scenario where ISPs can provide much more expensive plans for foreign traffic. Not a lot of people are going to have the finances and ability to go through the trouble of paying for the internet access, foreign traffic and a bleeding edge VPN to access youtube.
Also lol @ him claiming internet censorship and restricting freedom of speech are different things, when a state newspaper recently published an article claiming that the iranian internet blackout is a massive attack on human rights and might lead to the end of the regime (check out Steve Rosenberg on YT if you are curious).
Yes, that’s what they are officially talking about, to reduce the amount of foreign traffic so to reduce the load on TSPU (which is the Russian alternative to China’s GFW). Pretty open about it.
The guy you mentioned is an editor for BBC news, which is kinda disappointing (US news outlets are owned by the same company)
deleted by creator
I’ll go ahead and file that one under “Yeah, no shit lol”
That won’t stop republicans in Utah from trying though. They’ll figure it out eventually.
really? russia cant stop it? perhaps this is good news for the people of the world that if a nation like russia cant stop it then that might bode well for the rest of us in dire conditions where we might need it.
A vpn is (basically) just a connection between two computers where they can interact with each other as if they were physically connected to the same local network (ergo, “Virtual Private Network”). That’s not possible to ban. They can go after commercial providers, but not the concept itself.
SOCKS proxies are plentiful… Just find one using a non-standard port and it’ll likely not be detected.
I’ve heard about socks for obfuscation of vpn traffic, but never understood how to configure it. Is it possible to use socks with your own wireguard server, or with some free/cheap vpn?
You can use SOCKS instead of a VPN. SOCKS proxies allow arbitrary socket connections. You can use them for anything. The biggest difference is a VPN routes all(most) your traffic, whereas SOCKS are typically only used for specific(explicit) connections. Both other strong end-to-end encryption, obfuscating what you’re doing.
The good thing is the abundance of residential and mobile SOCKS proxies. So you look like a regular person on the Internet and you’re not using commercial IP ranges.
Duh
Good
lol, lmao
