So just to be clear, Mullvad users aren’t benefiting from this arrangement?
1 Like
AmneziaWG Is this a protocol Obscura could add it appears to be the next stage in Wg development? For use especially where QUIC is disrupted / blocked ?
Is there a road map for the iOS app ?
Do you plan to add support for vpn Turing off on designated trusted WiFi & support for iOS shortcuts or similar.
promising app and idea
From our investigations AmneziaWG is strictly worse than Obscura’s QUIC-based protocol w/re obfuscation.
VPN turning off on designated trusted WiFi is tricky, because Apple APIs only allow matching based on SSID name (e.g. “Carl’s Home WiFi”), which can be easily spoofed. (Link to Apple API) We may allow this with a warning to users though!
It’s interesting how many people are asking for iOS shortcuts, we’ll look into it!
2 Likes
Thank you.
You may have answered this already, but I’ve read everything on this forum and elsewhere but couldn’t see this
3 connections is too few. I’m not averse to paying more and getting a reasonable number of connections.
protonVPN offer 10 (has its uses for when family members are travelling abroad for short trips). IVPN I think 7. Mullvad 5.
Please offer a package with a higher number of connections.
it also needs a kill switch. If the connection drops data goes off. On iOS.
a windows app would be great.
Have you considered reaching out to Passepartout’s developer ?
1 Like
AmneziaWG is being pushed by another provider as being unblockable by censors in censored countries. That’s why I asked. I take on board your post. So your method is better basically?
Mullvad IPs are blacklisted a lot of places. Maybe Mullvad can do something about this.
Understood, we’ll look into it. For now, you can always have more than 1 Obscura account!
Working on it now.
Definitely!
Yes I think so. We have a fully custom protocol that we built in-house.
1 Like
Thank you for what you are doing.
Have been waiting since you launched for iOS support. it’s quite a milestone. I think there is great potential in what you are offering.
2 Likes
Is it true that Obscura receives / has received VC funding ? Is this something to be concerned about when considering as a provider?
For context, this claim might come from their social media. Kagi Search
Yes, we do have VC investors.
This may be a concern when choosing between “Traditional VPN” providers (Single-Party Relays) since you need to trust them wholly.
However, I believe this is much less of a concern with Multi-Party Relays like Obscura since a MPR provider will never have both your personal info and your traffic.
Additionally, it is much easier to switch between VPN providers than it is to switch between “cloud drive” providers (for example) since VPN providers don’t store anything you’d need to transfer.
1 Like
Are you at liberty to disclose any details for or about those investors?
We specifically chose investors who’d be strongly supportive of our stance on Privacy and Digital Freedom, so I’m not sure they’d appreciate us listing their names on a public forum 
1 Like
I don’t understand the logic for why you can’t disclose then. It’s not something to be ashamed of but to be proud.
Transparency is key for any privacy product and its business. Inability or unwillingness to disclose does not bode well.
If you don’t have their consent, please speak with them about potential new customers wanting to know so they may decide now that we are asking.
But alright, duly noted.
1 Like
Could you also clarify with specificity your stance as you put it. So atleast we know what exactly that is. I ask because beliefs in privacy can still be a wide enough spectrum so some clarity for the record would be appreciated.
It’s like this, even Nord and Express VPN may believe in privacy for all. But their stance on the same is way off compared to Privacy Guides’ stance on the same. And compared to many people on here.
I don’t mean to sound like I’m trying to grill you or be pretentiously demanding. Please don’t infer this from my comment. I ask because it’s a genuine earnest question I have now seeing you cannot disclose anything about your money men.
1 Like
Yeah, anonymity is the antithesis of transparency. I mention “anonymity” specifically because many people, including in the privacy community, can’t differentiate between anonymity, pseudo-anonymity, and privacy. I personally believe that everyone has the right to anonymity, and “digital freedom” should include anonymity.
That really depends. They may reside in a country that doesn’t like VPNs, for example.
There are select few countries that really detest VPNs and China is the richest of them all. It is not unreasonable to presume that Obscura’s VC investors are only from “Western” countries who clearly have the funds to invest as VCs. Hence, I don’t think what you’re saying is the case. And if it were the case, then we’d have bigger questions to ask Obscura and it would still not bode well at all.
But let’s not digress and speculate unreasonably. I’m hoping @obscuracarl can clarify their funding questions potential new users are starting to have as I ask this in good faith.
You are generalizing a lot, which is not good. Some “Western” countries, whatever that means, do show some hostility towards VPNs or anonymity in general. The UK is one example. That being said, that doesn’t matter. You don’t understand what I said.
Another example is that they may fear potential career repercussions, especially in industries sensitive to public affiliations. All I want to say is that there are many good reasons why people want anonymity.
Even if there is no real reasons for anonymity, the desire for anonymity should still be respected.
1 Like
No western country goes after VPNs like China does. You seem to have a different understanding of what
mean and
(scoffs)
You are yourself conflating two very different degrees of how nation states can be against VPNs. The two things you have said yourself don’t mean the same thing, even by definition of the words in the English language.
–
You are speculating to a point of unfairly mischaracterizing Obscura partnering with questionable entities. Stop. I’m not the one continuing to unnecessarily speculate. I’m trying to bring the conversation back to topic. Let’s not debate any semantic differences you may think we have that needs clarification on this thread.
No where in the world in public does anonymity exists if you’re part or a member of civilization. Let’s not even touch anonymity as its not relevant here.
Then I’m afraid it is against transparency that’s needed for a privacy product or service. How can you form trusts with entities that do not disclose themselves and what they do, how, and what they are about?
I don’t believe you are thinking about this in the right way and your rationale on this needs tweaking if you ask me. I’ll just leave it at that.