Leaderboard

I have been facing a predicament for months, which is that Steam thinks i'm a bot and doesn't let me play any multiplayer games in.. multiplayer, and I can't turn my VPN off to use all 5 ports on it to host numerous servers. The problem is, there isn't a way to IP or domain whitelist Steam, since I don't know any of the ip's it uses to connect, and they change alot. This is where app-based tunneling would shine though, and here is why 1. App based tunelling would most likely save you guys alot of bandwidth, now people can tell the VPN to send web browser connections through their actual internet, and then you won't have alot of traffic taken up by YouTube streams 2. This defeats the need to switch to other clients, which is clunky and complicated. 3. It lets you do everything in one app (Eddie), which is extremely convenient and simple for newcomers to use, probably bringing more subscribers to the VPN too since split-tunneling is a useful feature 4. It straight up lets you split tunnel some stuff in the first place, such as Steam i've already mentioned, which uses a variety of ip's and domains i don't know, and i'm not about to spend a few hours in wireshark getting all the ip's/domains and adding them. So please, 4 good reasons on why app split-tunneling should be added to Eddie. P.S. another thing I noticed was that the split-tunneling already in Eddie didn't seem to work until I reconnected the VPN, is this a limitation, a bug, or just something that isn't added? - Thanks, a pleading CS2 player and server hoster

With some help from Claude I have put together a GTK4 client for Linux. https://gitlab.com/snotra.uk/airvpn Uses the API to grab servers and configs, uses network manager to setup the wireguard connections, and firewalld for the network lock. Seems to be working well for me. might be useful to someone. cheers Shaun

@blueport26 Hello! First and foremost we must say that we have not updated our knowledge on Poland data retention legal framework. Our old information tells us that it's NOT compliant with the latest decisions of the CJEU which forbid Member States to put any obligation on any provider of service in the information society for pre-emptive, blanket, indiscriminate data retention. All that follows is therefore based on our not up-to-date knowledge. Feel free to point us to the relevant laws if we base our decision on no more valid knowledge. Now, we can actually ignore the EU Member States legal frameworks on data retention where they clearly infringe the EU Court of Justice legally binding decisions, because in a casus belli we can challenge, or defend against, the rogue Member State with high likelihood of winning. At the same time, we must carefully decide which legal battle fronts we want to open, because legal costs for cases which must be brought up to the highest courts may easily become very high. We are already challenging Spain legal framework on Data Retention, and, given AirVPN size, it's not wise to challenge multiple Member States simultaneously. That's the main reason we do not operate VPN servers in France and Italy, other Member States whose data retention framework is in flagrant violation of the legally binding decisions of the CJEU. We're not like those marketing fluff based VPNs which lie to you and in reality perform Data Retention in the countries where it is mandatory: you have plenty of examples from the press to prove what we claim here, when VPN customers identities and activities have been disclosed because of that very same data retention the VPN providers claimed not to perform. When we say we do not retain data and metadata of your traffic we really do it, that's why we must carefully evaluate the countries legal framework we plan to operate servers within. Kind regards P.S. Ukraine does not oblige dacenters and VPN providers to any data retention.

There are surely some similarities between the two systems, fair enough. And still you need to differentiate between them so that you don't spread FUD, the most dangerous kind of information in times of Trumpism everywhere. A dictatorship is characterized as a one-man political system. The best successor is believed to be the choice of that dictator. In a monarchy on the other hand, all power is in the hands of a family. The best successor is believed to be the descendant of a monarch. Here's a non-Wikipedia source for you. And another one. And another one. Then you need to tell the "classical" hereditary monarchy, the ones depicted in history books and probably Game of Thrones or something, apart from a constitutional one. This one is a literal game changer, let me tell you, because in a constitutional monarchy a king/queen does only hold ceremonial power at best, which disqualifies the stated EU monarches as dictatorial, seeing as their political system is effectively a collection of mechanics from democracies, like a party system and the separation of powers (example Netherlands: parties like PvdA (social democrats) and 50PLUS (conservatives/senior focus) debating in the Tweede Kamer (= House of Representatives) about laws and regulations = the legislative, even though King Willem-Alexander is in fact king). The closest thing to what you describe would be the absolute monarchy which is where I would agree with you that it can be strikingly similar. But we don't have those in the EU (save for Vatican City, maybe), and this is an objective fact. How you feel about this is unimportant. Now, let's stop the off-topic. Should anyone want to discuss this further with me and others, post to the Off-Topic forum or write me a message. ---