Seriously, though, when you work in IT, you constantly use VPNs as basic infrastructure, just to connect devices into larger networks. It is such a fundamental technology that the Linux kernel – the core of the operating system – ships an implementation (WireGuard).
Trying to regulate that is akin to regulating cables. Sure, cables can be used to access things you might not want. But good luck writing a law that prohibits the use of cables only specifically for the things you don’t want, without being so complex that it results in tons of bureacracy for all kinds of organizations.
And even then, it would necessarily lead to legitimate use-cases being prohibited, because you often cannot, and really should not be able to, see the traffic that users send over the infrastructure you provide them.
There’s a difference between what you’re talking about and the types of VPN they’re talking about banning. They can easily ban the exchange of money in return for encrypted proxy services.
Don’t be naive, the use of VPN’s in IT doesn’t protect us.
FineCoatMummy@sh.itjust.works
on 20 May 18:42
collapse
When you’re taking after such esteemed defenders of human rights as …<checks notes> … North Korea, Belarus, Oman, China, and Russia, you might want to have another think about this.
threaded - newest
I can’t help but think that this is the result of the CEO wanting to protect the company’s investment instead of actually caring.
I know there’s still good people in there, but as a whole, much of what they’ve done recently has earned my distrust.
Seriously, though, when you work in IT, you constantly use VPNs as basic infrastructure, just to connect devices into larger networks. It is such a fundamental technology that the Linux kernel – the core of the operating system – ships an implementation (WireGuard).
Trying to regulate that is akin to regulating cables. Sure, cables can be used to access things you might not want. But good luck writing a law that prohibits the use of cables only specifically for the things you don’t want, without being so complex that it results in tons of bureacracy for all kinds of organizations.
And even then, it would necessarily lead to legitimate use-cases being prohibited, because you often cannot, and really should not be able to, see the traffic that users send over the infrastructure you provide them.
There’s a difference between what you’re talking about and the types of VPN they’re talking about banning. They can easily ban the exchange of money in return for encrypted proxy services.
Don’t be naive, the use of VPN’s in IT doesn’t protect us.
UK, meet Utah.
Utah, meet the UK.
When you’re taking after such esteemed defenders of human rights as …<checks notes> … North Korea, Belarus, Oman, China, and Russia, you might want to have another think about this.