Leaderboard

Hello! Very interesting analytical and investigative work by Windscribe disclosing ties (even hidden ones) between VPN companies, publishers, review web sites. Click on node icons to read more details. Very sinister situation at a glance. Note for example how Crossrider (now Kape), well known malware company co-founded by a member of israeli Defense Forces Unit 8200, nowadays controls major VPNs and review web sites: https://embed.kumu.io/9ced55e897e74fd807be51990b26b415#vpn-company-relationships/control-d Kind regards

No, if all peers were not reachable BitTorrent would not work at all. The reason is trivial, just study how the protocol works. Actually there are many "dead torrents" not because there are no peers with the complete file, but because those peers in the swarm are active but not reachable. You have the impression that torrenting works even if some peers in a swarm are unreachable only because there are peers which are reachable in that swarm, so unreachable nodes (leechers) can keep leeching. This is the essence of the claims "you can keep torrenting even without remote port forwarding": yes, provided that parasites in a swarm can leech thanks to the effort of others. Maybe you should study how the protocol works before insulting. We're momentarily locking this thread, too many off topics are making it confusing. Kind regards

Been using WhatsApp on my iPhone with AirVPN connections for years and never experienced any issue ... regardless of server country or protocol (UDP/TCP).

@Staff thank you for adding the "devices" API a while ago. Feel free to close this topic.

I doubt whatsapp makes a per IP address decision when banning accounts. Usually, most mobile carriers use IPv4 NAT so thousands of customers share the same IP address when connecting to whatsapp. I think what matters more is: - age of your whatsapp account, if it's brand new and gets spam report, it's banned; - how much whatsapp traffic you've made (messages sent/received) and the percent % for which reports were sent - if 90% if your messages are reported, it is obvious that there is something wrong with them and most probably they are "abusive" as per their terms and conditions; I use whatsapp with AirVPN servers and never had a problem, I use for both group messages, normal messages and voice calls / video calls - all working in normal parameters. Which server did you use and why do you think the server is to blame for your whatsapp account ban? See the reasons above and give us an estimate of that.

No matter what cipher you pick the CPU load stays the same? difficult to say but it seemed like CPU load is less with AES than with chacha yet chacha was a little faster. pfsense and using IPsec-MB

This is VERY eye opening. Thanks for sharing it. Those people are malign. I don't want to get political, but we know that what comes from IDF and its associates is nothing but evil.

Upcoming Frankfurt infrastructure maintenance on July 4, 2023. The following 3 servers will remain down for 8 hours. Quote: === In the coming period, Leaseweb will move all services from FRA-10 to the new state-of-the-art Iron Mountain datacenter (FRA-01) in Frankfurt. Therefore, we will need to perform scheduled maintenance on part of our infrastructure. WHEN CAN YOU EXPECT IT Timezone: CEST (UTC+02:00) July 04, 2023 09:00 - July 04, 2023 17:00 Duration: 8h WHAT IS THE IMPACT ON YOUR SERVICE? Your dedicated server(s) will be physically migrated to the FRA-01 datacenter to retain the IP addresses for your dedicated server. The server will be offline during the maintenance window. Please be assured that we will do our utmost best to keep the downtime as minimal as possible, and our engineers are available during and after the migration should any issues arise. Server(s) impacted by the migration: Dedicated Server - Intercrus Dedicated Server - Veritate Dedicated Server - Tucana === Kind regards & datalove AirVPN Staff

After WeVPN shut down for liquidity problems and OVPN was sold low priced to a big group, after PIA accumulated a stratospheric 35 M USD debt in less than 5 years and was saved only by the huge monetary availability of Crossrider/Kape, after the bankruptcy of additional small and independent VPN in the fresh past, it's reassuring to see that your infrastructure keeps expanding and you stay independent. Way to go! 😍

Not only TikTok. For example the Bitcoin network can not be controlled so a transaction from an American citizen could potentially go to a citizen of a country that's "a menace" for the USA (definition of enemy and menace is discretionary, the used language seems fine tuned to allow scope enlargement at will without judiciary supervision). Since that's not controllable, we find it potentially possible that operators might be required to block "the Bitcoin network". What's worse, according to a preliminary interpretation of the text, if in some way (difficult but personal and house search, pre-selected through the usual monitoring performed by USA ISPs, can help...) it can be proved that a USA citizen has used some tool like Tor or VPN to access any of the blocked network / services etc., that citizen will be prosecuted: civil liability up to a million of dollars, and criminal behavior subjected to up to 20 years in jail - which, if we're not mistaken, is worse than in China, Russia, and various countries controlled by human rights hostile regimes. Kind regards

@Visentinel According to a preliminary and very quick legal analysis the Act can be used to charge USA citizens and any company operating in the USA (even non-USA companies, of course) with civil and criminal liability for using Tor, VPN, proxy services, Bitcoin and various open source tools which facilitate encrypted communications to bypass any kind of censorship. Apparently, the language picked for the Act allows to enlarge and broaden the scope of the Act at will. Should the Act be approved as it is, and should the will to enforce it in the broader sense is strong, it is possible that there is no future for the Tor Project and consumers VPN in the USA, if not underground. Simply accessing the Bitcoin blockchain to transfer coins may be easily included as a forbidden action by the Act scope. We underline that all of the above is based on a preliminary legal analysis, which may change after more thorough examination. Sources. Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RESTRICT_Act Vice: https://vice.com/en/article/4a3ddb/restrict-act-insanely-broad-ban-tiktok-vpns Decrypt: https://decrypt.co/124892/coin-center-restrict-act-ban-bitcoin Official current draft: https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/686/text?s=1&r=15 We're open to more discussion, opinions and legal analysis. Kind regards

Hello! We're very glad to inform you that the feature has been implemented. Please check your account API explorer in your API panel for information and usage. Service: devices https://airvpn.org/apisettings/ Kind regards

Yes, a very nice one. Apparently it is perfectly formulated, because it's 100% true and accurate, and it's not formulated here, but there. It's mentioned because Crossrider/Kape was founded by a member of Unit 8200, a cyber spy agency, and its (Crossrider's) primary business was facilitating malware and computer infections. Recently it acquired major VPNs (such as Private Internet Access, Express VPN and CyberGhost) as well as review web sites. In reality in the FT article you mention you can read the interview to Lempert (chairman of the Unit 8200 alumni association and CEO of MER mobile comms group) who claims that 8200 is focusing (the article is 7 years old) on huge data mining, which is exactly extensive surveillance of the Internet, and we could also mention the documents leaked by Snowden, which revealed how Unit 8200, referred to as ISNU, receives raw, unfiltered data of U.S. citizens, as part of a secret agreement with the NSA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Israel_Memorandum_of_Understanding_SIGINT.pdf Are US citizens "bad neighbors" too? Anyway. It's irrelevant whether the purposes of Kape match those of Unit 8200. Kape could be or not a puppet of 8200, you don't know and we don't know, and perhaps it's not, and still that's not the point. The relevance of a member of 8200 founding a company spreading malware and now controlling VPN is the relationships and competence acquired by that member during his/her previous job, used against citizens unconditionally, since Kape operated essentially in browser hijacking, ad injectors and other remunerative computer infections worldwide. Remember for example Gericke ("strangely", he is also ExpressVPN CIO), Adams and Baier: they used their great competence acquired while they worked for US intelligence agencies to assist UAE regime to crack journalists, activists, monarchy political opponents phones and computers, to help UAE suppress or control any possible dissident or uncomfortable journalist. Officially it was not CIA or USIC interest to do that (and actually all three of them have been charged by DoJ for that "job") but anyway they greatly succeeded in their UAE job because they were trained by and had the knowledge of and access to certain technology from their former employers. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/three-former-us-intelligence-community-and-military-personnel-agree-pay-more-168-million Kind regards

Hello AirVPN Staff and others. I would very much like to have an API call for creating and removing port forwardings, including requesting a random port. This would allow users to have a different port open for every session started. Setting up a port to be forwarded is already pretty simple, but it does still require having a web browser running and logging in to Air. This may be a small obstacle, but an obstacle nonetheless. I strongly suspect many people will set up a port forwarding only once, and then using the same port for all future sessions, and this has some negative implications for privacy. It is already possible to have this functionality when talking to Air's web server through a browser and clicking buttons manually, so I'm making the assumption it will not be too difficult to do the same through an official HTTP-based API. Does this make sense? I'd love to hear what you think.

Bump, I too would like to see an API for port-forwarding management. In my case all I want to do: only do port-forwarding when my primary client is to be connected and remove PF on disconnect/shutdown so it is not unnecessarily kept track of. Any further software configuration due to changing port numbers is of course my own headache (firewall rules probably or further software APIs). Not the usual UPnP/NAT-PMP. Although maybe you'll eventually need it (to solve the port exhaustion problem). The problem with those: users have too little control over them in programs. For the sake of completeness, other threads when this was asked: 2016: https://airvpn.org/forums/topic/18317-forward-ports-api-support/?tab=comments#comment-43652 2017: https://airvpn.org/forums/topic/21706-api-for-port-forwarding/?tab=comments#comment-57135 2021: https://airvpn.org/forums/topic/49390-connectivity-check-on-httpsairvpnorgports-removed/?do=findComment&comment=166562