Right, ill just delete it up to the point where the discussion was sensible.
4 Likes
hi, where are we at with this ?
i think that Windscribe should be recommended because the only thing lacking was an audit and tje opensourceness of the iOS app and now one audit was published and the issues have been fixed.
2 Likes
This is approved ? Only a few months since audit.
I think we should wait at least for the next audit.
We already have 3 VPNs recommended. And none of them had scandals. I think they still have more to proof.
I also donât like their aggresive marketing. Last time I criticised them and they made hjghly misleading statement (I didnât have time to answers) and they said some of my concerns were âtinfoil hatâ.
Plus, they are spreading FUD about Proton
No itâs not approved still and donât understand why
Better stay close to the criteria. One audit is what is required (other recommended tools have only one audit I believe
This is not a requirement haha wtf ?? There is no max limit on the number of recommended tools !
Not true, even yourself said in the linked thread that there is no âsmear campaignâ.
Their marketing has already been discussed and itâs not problematic.
2 Likes
I never said if was.
Them basically saying I am liar and putting me a false intent doesnât look good.
Also, theiy still have their VPN Relationships map where they promote the fact that Proton are scammers. For example they say the a Privacy Tools megathread is âshadyâ, unclear if they refer to Proton or PT being shady. The actual megathread is just debunking.
1 Like
I am not saying that you said that this was a requirement neither. What I said is that we should recommend the tools that meet the criterias otherwise itâs just arbitrary. There is no sense in not recommending a tool that meets the criterias because we already trust 3 VPNs that meet as much the criteriaq
1 Like
It is my understanding that this is not how PG recommendations work.
The recommendation arenât just exhaustive lists of every tool that meets or exceeds the minimum. Minimum criteria are just minimum prerequisite criteria to even be considered. PGs recommendations are meant to reflect the top options for a given category. At least that is my understanding.
And (in my eyes), for categories like VPNs, where (1) there are already 3+ good and very reputable choices, and (2) its a category where trust in the provider is very important, there isnât really any urgency or strong incentive to rush a recommendation. A bit of caution/conservatism isnât a bad thing in this context.
6 Likes
I think the current 3 providers are all lacking in some way, for example Mullvad and IVPN donât allow port forwarding anymore while Proton doesnât accept Monero and also has limited port forwarding (ephemeral ports, no GUI for Linux). Windscribe on the other hand allows port forwarding and Monero payments.
Also I donât think 4 providers are too many. Look at how many recommendations there are in the email clients or password manager section.
5 Likes
Isnât trust established by the criteria about the audit ?
I donât think so either. But I do think there is much less urgency to add a recommendation when there are 3 or more good options, and no harm in being methodical and selective in that context.
That is all I intended to say (and clarification that meeting minimum requirements =/= an automatic and immediate recommendation). I didnât intend my comment to come off as opposing the inclusion of Windscribe (as a current Windscribe subscriber, I have some mild misgivings, and a few areas Windscribe could/should improve before they are on the same level as for example Mullvad, but those are mostly minor critiques)
On the matter of urgency vs conservatism, if I understand Windscribeâs blogpost correctly, the infrastructure that was audited, is their new infra which is still in the process of being rolled out (they expect the transition to be complete sometime this fall) and even their own docs havenât all been updated to reflect the completion of the audit yet.
Valid and relevant point about Monero though. (unconfirmed)
Port forwarding appears to be an additional paid feature only available to those who pay for and use a static IP or a residential IP in addition to their normal Windscribe subscription.
I think trust is rather personal and multifaceted, but for me, yes, undergoing audit(s) goes a long way to helping to establish a basis for trust.
I think (1) willingness to undergo an audit (2) publicly disclosing the results of that audit, (3) how a service responds to and improves from the audit, and (4) regular (routine) audits are all positive steps towards building trust and demonstrating trustworthiness.
But this is partially dependent on you reading and understanding the contents and scope of that audit (or reading a trusted 3rd partyâs analysis of it).
2 Likes
Windscribe allows Monero payments ? Do you have a source ?
Windscribe seems to give conflicting info on this. Their main pricing page doesnât list Monero among the available options.
But this page in the knowledgebase lists an extensive list of cryptocurrencies that does include Monero.
1 Like
You can definitively make payments with XMR. Windscribe utilizes CoinPayments as its cryptocurrency payment processor, which allows for XMR transactions.
1 Like
Yes this is the only provider which offer :
- XMR payment (unlike Proton)
- port forwarding (unlike the three current recommendations)
- dedicated IPs
- bigger network than Mullvad and IVPN (including more countries in Africa and LATAM which isnât that common)
- open-sourced all apps, have an audit
- a good linux app (unlike Proton)
- is transparent
- does not require email (unlike Proton)
- 100% RAM-only nodes (what about IVPN Mullvad and Proton?)
- has a censorship circumvention feature that seems to be one of the best, and a decoy traffic feature on Android (like Mullvad).
- not VC-funded (fully independent)
- Honest marketing
- Good guides about privacy for the end-user, about VPNs and the industry.
- Not as blacklisted as IVPN, in my experience.
It donât has double-hop for mobile though, nor quantum-resistant encryption (they are âin the process of beefing up our KEM (Key Encapsulation Mechanism) in TLS and OpenVPN protocols.â) however.
I think they should be added because they really try hard to get around censorship.
3 Likes
these two problems have been resolved.
I push Windscribe that hard because I think they really bring something new and needed to the table, that I canât find anywhere else.
1 Like
In response to a post I saw when scan reading this thread: please PG, recommend as many apps/services you like that meet high privacy standards. Some recommendations will not be a perfect fit for some users. For example, Iâm currently in an unfortunate position where I cannot afford to pay for a VPN, so that knocks out Mullvad and IVPN and leaves me with Proton VPN, which is what I am using. However, my preference is not to rely on Proton for everything on my phone (mail, etc), so if there are other free but trustworthy VPNs out there I would love to know.
To be clear, there isnât a limit on quantity of recommendations. Itâs just that if we already have a bunch, adding even more is a bit lower priority. The website has over 100,000 words, which is longer than many books, and every page needs to stay up to date.
Anyway, I havenât evaluated Windscribe myself (yet), I donât know if any other team members are working on that at the moment. So whether it does meet high standards I couldnât say 
3 Likes
Please stop using blur it makes quoting an hassle.
Anyway, Proton has limited port forwarding abilities.
Mullvad has RAM-only servers (source)
Mullvad probably equals them in this regard, F
I hope that those dedicated IPs change their ips weekly, because if not this is a big privacy risk.