Isn’t this the crux of the product that are VPNs? Why would one not want VPNs to have the best implementation of the tech available? And if this makes a difference or a small difference as you’ve seemed to talk about it, it’s still a large enough difference to make the difference between being added as an official recommendation and not being added.
That’s why I said in my last comment about me not being sure where you’re coming from with these suggestions and why. But like I said, you do you.
x VPN supports all of the features of the currently listed ones, but even more.
I don’t know, I think that’s a pretty good argument to add it.
It’s KYC vs non-KYC to me. I think the implication is quite large even if the actual effect is unlikely (will someone actually get saved from this feature?) But then again, why have any privacy feature at all? Certainly you can just trust the provider, but if the provider gives me reasons that mean even if they did log me, they would have fewer ways to tie it to me directly anyway just by default of how the system is set up. I think more factors of protection is always better, yes. Maybe having such a high standard isn’t the necessary prerogative of this site, but I think it’s important, yes.
I don’t think there is a good argument to be made as to how port forwarding is a privacy benefit. Its a nice feature to have but I don’t see it as something privacy guides should focus on.
Since Proton already offers port forwarding, its hard for me to see why changing the criteria just to include more port forwarding options is needed.
From a privacy perspective its probably better to avoid port forwarding where possible.
Well, that’s not entirely true. It’s the basis of why Mullvad removed it (and IVPN, though I think they were just copying Mullvad tbh). But I’m just playing devil’s advocate. In any case, if you agree that it’s privacy-neutral, then it shouldn’t matter to you if my request to have some VPNs that have port forwarding is approved because it wouldn’t have any downside in that case. The point is, is that is provides upside to the large variety of applications and instances where such a feature is required. So I think it’s good to have at least one.
This isn’t related to my proposal though. I’m saying this should be a goal/guideline that some VPNs listed do support port forwarding. As it stands, it’s entirely coincidental that there is one listed that does support it (Proton). But if Proton were ever to remove port-forwarding, without my proposal, nothing would happen to fix that. And, if you check my other post, I presented a problem that Proton has, which called for adding VPN options with stronger anonymity practices. (Namely, completely anonymous registrations and payments like XMR.)
Its just out of scope. “Why not?” is not a compelling reason for a criteria.
Its still unclear to me from a privacy perspective, why this feature has enough value to necessitate it being a requirement. What applications do you have in mind, that have strong privacy implications and need port forwarding, that are causing you to push this?
But your not providing any sort of reason why that would be the case on a privacy focused site.
The issue is you are creating a solution to a problem you created. Whether the problem or solution are what you say they are is still to be determined.
I don’t know if you’re trolling, but I’ve provided many examples why. There are countless examples of applications that require port forwarding. If youve never encountered one then I don’t know what to say… Hosting game servers, torrenting optimally (not relying on the other person to have port forwarding), literally anything that’s requires a peer to peer connection like countless games and software, remote hosting, running home servers, etc etc. Literally just Google examples. Privacy users need access to these apps too, that’s why it should be on there.
Sigh… For the nth time, I don’t think port forwarding should be a requirement. I think it should be a requirement that at least one VPN on the list have the option. There’s so many instances where one might use it. And just cause you don’t use it, doesn’t mean other power users don’t.
I think you’re seriously underestimating the amount of people who use VPNs exclusively for torrenting as well. And I know it’s not a strict requirement, but it is if you want to maximize connections, because either you or the other person needs it. And if they don’t have it, then why handicap yourself for literally no reason?