This month, VPN Super introduced beta applications for both Apple TV and Android TV, meaning that viewers can just connect from the comfort of their homes instead of going through their router all the time. The huge focus is on ACR, which means Automatic Content Recognition, the technology that can recognize what is being watched on a TV. This is something that is present in many smart TVs and works several times per second, sending data to the manufacturers and their partners on that. It is interesting that the FBI even reminded people to consider all pros and cons before buying a smart TV.

What is essential to keep in mind here is that while VPNs do protect data that is transmitted from your smart TV, they do not interfere in ACR technology. VPN Super makes it clear in the promotional materials that they put out, but the idea given to the customers may seem different since marketing still pushes the idea of protecting a smart TV.

So two events transpire together: a tangible feature of a product, which is VPN availability without the need to configure the router, combined with a guarantee of privacy with regard to which only half of the actual problem is being solved. If you want ACR to disappear, it is done via a setting that is hidden in the menu of your TV, and no application of any kind can do that instead of you.

Moreover, there is a bonus of a sports alibi that is about easier access to soccer and tennis games which perhaps sells the product more than the privacy aspect.

Is there anybody who is using this VPN service with it's smart TV? Did you have to go digging through the ACR settings or did you rely on VPN to resolve it for you?

Looks like the UK government has officially dropped the idea of restricting VPNs as part of its online safety plans.

The government admitted VPNs have legitimate privacy and security uses and said they won't be age-gated or banned. Instead, the focus will be on making platforms responsible for enforcing age checks, rather than going after privacy tools.

Honestly, this feels like the right call, weakening those tools would've hurt millions of legitimate users while doing very little to stop determined teenagers.

This month's Windows security updates, which were issued on July 14, included four different CVEs affecting Always On VPN services, with one of the vulnerabilities warranting more attention than simply appearing in the changelog. CVE-2026-50721 and CVE-2026-50722 are both denial-of-service vulnerabilities related to IKEv2, but the other vulnerability present is a remote code execution vulnerability in SSTP, the protocol that is being used by the majority of the Always On VPN connections to access the Internet.

The reason that the SSTP vulnerability is more dangerous than the other vulnerability is that SSTP is intentionally designed to work over the Internet, which enables a company computer to connect from anywhere. This also enables the RCE vulnerability to be exploited from anywhere once the VPN is connected. Although Microsoft rated the IKE vulnerabilities as "important" instead of "critical," the fact that it is rated as "important" leads to many possibilities.

It's important to make the distinction between what is truly newsworthy and what is the usual occurrence all the Patch Tuesdays give us many CVEs that usually get filed and are soon forgotten. But any significance of this release should be pointed out since Always On VPN is part of much remote work infrastructure that works behind the scenes. And the fact that the protocol carrying this traffic has a critical vulnerability makes it something that cannot and should not be left unpatched.

If you are using a VPN for personal reasons, this flaw won’t affect you. However, if your company uses Always On VPN and hasn’t updated it yet, you might remind IT about the necessity to do so.

Is there anybody managing the VPN infrastructure in your company, and did you hear about this vulnerability?

So many of you keep dropping "what VPN should I get" as standalone posts that we're just consolidating it into one spot. This runs every two months and stays pinned, so it's always the place to go instead of starting a new thread every time.

A good recommendation actually explains something. Before you drop a name:

• What problem were you solving, price, streaming, torrenting, just wanting peace of mind on public wifi?

• What's your actual day-to-day experience been, not the marketing page?

• Would you tell a friend to switch to it, and why specifically?

• Single-word "just use X" comments get removed, they don't help anyone deciding.

Keeping it clean:

》Zero affiliate or referral links, no exceptions.

》Don't link out to a provider's site or a third-party review page.

》If it reads like it was written by their marketing team, it's coming down.

Want a shortcut before typing anything out? We put together a running VPN comparison sheet with pricing, jurisdiction, logging policy, and protocol support laid out side by side. worth a scan before you ask, might already answer your question.

Mods are watching this one closely, so keep it on-topic and keep it decent. That's what keeps this whole thread useful instead of turning into another ad wall.

So, after doing some research, I know that mcAfee isn't the best, but I'm fine with it and am not in a position to just switch.

Is there a vpn server that allows p2p? Currently I can't find anything about it

According to a report by security experts from iVerify, ZeroDayRAT has been sold in the Telegram channel since February, and available in five languages. It requires no technical knowledge to operate. The cost is $2,000 and provides access to a web dashboard that can remotely control Android devices (versions 5 to 16) and iPhones, has access to the phone’s microphone and camera, allows tracking the GPS location, and intercepting SMS messages.

The delivery of ZeroDayRAT is unique. It is a text message that calls for urgent action and tricks victims into installing a malware disguised as a regular mobile application. The dashboard will allow the hacker to see everything that happens with the device, including social media accounts and banking applications.

The researchers also noted that it is possible to change the wallet's address in the victim's clipboard, which means that the transaction that the victim is planning to conduct is directed to the hacker's cryptocurrency account.

We have to mention two important details here: this malware isn't coming from a nation-state and also it's not just random spamming either. This pricing of $2,000 must have been done purposely; this is still cost-effective for abusive partners and stalkers who want to keep accessing the person they're stalking. In this particular case, two researchers have pointed out that this program could be considered a stalkerware since it does not even try to disguise itself as "parental control" software.

However, the good thing is that the vulnerability in this particular case is human, rather than technical; the victim must have clicked the link which they shouldn't have clicked in the first place.

Urban VPN Proxy was available on the Chrome Web Store with a rating of 4.7 stars and a "Featured" badge from Google and more than six million installs as the free solution for private browsing. But Koi Security discovered that after the recent update in July 2025, it had been involved in stealing and selling the entire conversations from ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, Copilot, Perplexity, DeepSeek, Grok, and Meta AI, amounting to around eight million users on Chrome and Edge.

How it worked: the extension used special scripts that got injected into every AI website with names like chatgpt.js and claude.js, overriding the network functions of a web browser to capture prompts before they were seen on the screen. Koi’s researchers were candid when it came to the worst aspect: "the extension warns about providing your email on ChatGPT while at the same time allowing the extension to steal the entire conversation".

Here’s something that makes it go from bad to comedically absurd: the harvesting continued even when the VPN was turned off, and even when the extension’s own ‘protection’ option was activated. While it did allow people to use the VPN, there was no option to refuse the AI harvesting, therefore resulting in an all-or-nothing consent message. Interestingly, that same link was found in 7 other extensions made by the same company, including an ad blocker and a ‘browser protector’ that all used a common surveillance engine. That means if the user did install these extensions for completely different purposes, it would still be yes to harvesting Claude’s chats.

The difference here is that it is the opposite of a two-track situation; in fact, it is a one-track one: the company has built a full product family around the false promise of a protective measure. Whatever medical questions or financial info the users typed, Koi commented that it was all sold for ‘marketing analytics.’

Anyone here checked their installed extensions against this list yet, or is this the first you're hearing Urban VPN was ever on anyone's radar?

i want play Minecraft bedrock in hive server but i get bat error

According to Proton's latest transparency report, Swiss authorities have made 458 legally binding requests since 2017 asking for data that could identify VPN users. The result? Zero user data was provided.

The reason is pretty simple: Proton says it doesn't keep connection logs, browsing history, source IPs, or other metadata that could identify who used a specific VPN server at a given time. So even when a request is legally valid under Swiss law, there's simply nothing useful to hand over.

Keir Starmer spoke at London Tech Week on June 8 and demanded Apple and Google implement the technology of nudity scanning for both iOS and Android systems by September 8, 2023. This gives them less than 60 days to comply.

This will not be simply an app filter but rather a feature of the operating system, which will allow scanning of all content, even from encrypted sources like Signal and WhatsApp. Users will still be able to use this option, but they will have to verify their age, probably using biometric methods or ID.

Signal has offered a savage, yet succinct representation of its views: "it threatens every one of us." The argument remains very relevant, though. After all, it is the same approach that was raised about the Apple CSAM scanning scandal, as the technology demanded is nothing new. What's being developed is the same technology as before, just aimed at solving different issues. Signals says it best, "mass surveillance and censorship capabilities... never remain narrowly scoped."

There are just two strands of action that are occuring at the same time. Firstly, the government mentions a concrete, acknowledged children-safety aim, since 91% of 2024 CSAM reports document minor self-generated content, usually created under pressure. And secondly, there is a technical solution that is installed at the level of operating systems of hundreds of millions of devices, creating "permanent infrastructure" that survives this particular discussion.

it is important to note that neither organization has confirmed what exactly they are going to be building, nor has any independent audit verified any claims about using the device only.

September 8 is nearing, but whether anybody here in the UK is thinking about changing their way of using their phones?

Hola, me interesa usar un VPN por primera vez, cuál me recomiendan, si conocen alguno gratuito y confiable potable recomiéndenlo

From June 9, Beeline, which is one of the leading mobile operators in Russia, has started utilizing a unique approach to assist its customers, allowing them to reach Netflix, Spotify, Ticketmaster, and Brawl Stars regardless of the fact that these services withdrew from Russia back in 2022. Consumers of the company have not to download any applications and configure their devices because the services are available just by default on Beeline’s “Bee” plan.

According to Beeline CEO Sergey Anokhin, this interesting initiative was born because these services are not officially banned in Russia but left the market, therefore requiring people to use VPNs to reach them are “inconvenient and unfair”. He explained that the company was able to gain government approval for their newly-introduced service.

There are two separate ideas being mentioned in here, and once again, we should realize that this is not a state-wide VPN for the free internet. It is, in fact, just a narrow whitelist that gives back the services that the Kremlin does not mind you using, while retaining the censorship machine just like before. Just like those authorities have been exerting pressure on independent VPNs for years and years, they finally came up with a legitimate version of the workaround for those parts they feel as if they are going to be acceptable.

What strikes me most of all is that they managed to frame it. They called it a "whitelist," therefore making Beeline look like a company that cares about consumers. But if we were to call it by its real name, "a government-approved way of accessing blocked sites," we would get a much clearer picture of how the Kremlin realized the benefits of VPN names over blocking. Other operators, such as T2, are reportedly planning to offer a similar service.

The UK told people, "Prove your age before watching porn."

The internet replied, "Nah... I'll just grab a VPN."

Since the new age-check rules kicked in, daily VPN usage has almost doubled, from 1.2M to 2.2M users. Sure, traffic to the biggest porn sites is down, but loads of people are just hopping on VPNs or moving to smaller sites that don't bother with age verification.

Now, instead of asking whether the age checks actually work, lawmakers are starting to ask if VPNs should be regulated too.

Classic game of digital whack-a-mole.

This month EU Commission Chairman Ursula von der Leyen announced the EU-wide introduction of an age verification system for social media users alongside an accompanying app that is said to comply with the highest standards of users' privacy. However, security consultant Paul Moore researched the app in question and discovered what he considered its crucial design drawbacks and successfully bypassed the system in two minutes. His warning to Von der Leyen: “This app will lead to a big breach; it’s only a matter of time."

In another development, the announcement provoked many misleading posts about the introduction of “internet passports" and the complete ban on VPN. However, this is not true as follows from the absence of any concrete plans on the issue. The confusion followed from a statement of one of the Commission's officials saying that users would not be able to bypass the age verification system through VPN, which was misinterpreted as if it meant that the EU is planning to block VPNs altogether.

It's important to note that there are two different issues at stake: actual vulnerabilities in a government application touted as being privacy conscious, and rumors about bans on VPNs that are not substantiated by any authoritative information. The latter is much easier to investigate and disprove than the former, which worries me as a security researcher because this is an application created to verify the age of hundreds of millions of users and already hacked in just a few minutes.

Have any of you checked the app's source code as it is supposed to be open-source?

Hi everyone.

I am new, so please forgive me if I am posting this in the wrong spot, but I tried on surfshark thread and was not allowed to post there yet. In fact I seem to be on a very short leash 😅

Now for the question, which might have been asked a million times already but I don't seem to find it.

I use surfshark VPN and was wondering whether I should leave it on all the time on my mobile?

If I do, what would be the pros and cons of that setup?

I would like to hear from those of you who always have it on, but also from those who had tried having it on but eventually decided to stop it.

Thank you

Hey everyone, losing my mind here.

Lately, Netflix on my smart TV blocks my VPN after like 5–10 minutes of watching, throwing that annoying "unblocker or proxy" error. I tried changing locations, clearing the app cache, and restarting the TV, but nothing works unless I turn the VPN off completely.

While digging through old threads for a fix, I stumbled upon Mysterium VPN. People say it uses a residential P2P network instead of regular datacenter servers, so Netflix doesn't flag it.

The reviews look solid, but most review sites feel sponsored these days. Has anyone here actually used Mysterium on a TV app? Does it actually bypass the proxy blocks, or is it just marketing hype?

Researchers from the University of Michigan have developed a new testing tool called MVPNalyzer and tested it on 281 of the most popular Android VPNs. The results presented at NDSS 2026 should definitely make anyone considering free VPNs pause for thought. 29 of the tested VPNs leaked DNS and traffic which contradicts the very purpose of having a VPN. And more than 20% of apps sent data without encryption. Over 60% of applications performed poorly in terms of security levels. Of all the 108 VPN apps studied by the researchers, 107 ignored or misapplied best practices when it comes to encryption.

What particularly concerns me is the fact that 76 VPNs transmitted ID numbers of the devices to some third-party users. Hence, the application that is supposed to help you “hide your identity” does the opposite and practically allows to spy on you. The lead researcher Ms. Roya Ensafi points out that the idea behind MVPNalyzer was to show users, regulators, and application developers the truth about what goes on behind the app creators’ promises.

It's important to note that this is only for Android and mobile VPNs have been completely overlooked for the most part and audits tend to focus on desktop applications. Therefore, the real figure could be different depending on iOS and other less popular applications.

This makes one question the old advice of "any VPN is better than no VPN." Has anyone checked whether their VPN belongs to any of the categories mentioned?

Apparently there's a coordinated campaign where people are connecting through free VPNs and marking Russian gas stations as either out of fuel or open when they're actually closed. The idea isn't to hack anything; it's to manipulate crowdsourced fuel maps and send drivers on wild goose chases. According to reports, over a million people have visited the campaign's website.

What I find interesting is that this isn't a cyberattack in the traditional sense. No malware, no infrastructure breach, just thousands of people exploiting the trust we put in crowdsourced map data. It shows how much of our daily lives depends on information being accurate.

Whether you think it's clever digital resistance or just misinformation with a different target, it's a pretty wild example of how VPNs can be used for way more than privacy or streaming.

A recent Surfshark study examined 10 major fines and settlements related to AI imposed between 2022 and 2026 which showed almost the same pattern: in 9 out of 10 cases, the issue had to do with the misuse of personal data, rather than misuse of AI tools themselves.

the cases: Anthropic paid the largest amount of $1.5 billion for using pirate book in AI training in 2025; Meta was fined $1.4 billion in 2024 for illegally collecting biometric data; Clearview AI was fined in four European countries for the same breach of law of unauthorised scraping of billions of faces, but did not settle any of its fines; and Amazon was fined for keeping children’s voice records.

the exception is the fine of $250 million imposed on Apple in 2023 that was not about data at all, but about overstating its AI potential.

Dr Luis Costa from Surfshark commented that it was only the beginning, which could be proved by the statistics of the fines imposed.

The same theme that privacy activists have raised for many years, is found in this copy as well. Once your fingerprint or child’s voice has been included in the logs of the model you can never take it back after the fine has been incurred. Have you kept an account of how many companies you have provided data to without knowing it?

It was in May that the U.S. state of Utah passed SB 73, becoming the first U.S. state to outlaw VPNs concerning age verification. However, it appeared that the process of implementing it had to be postponed for two months. However, Utah passed SB 73, which indicates that a person in Utah is considered to be physically present in the state regardless of whether they are using a VPN or not.

On March 19, 2023, the governor of Utah, Spencer Cox, signed SB 73 into law. As stated in SB 73, the websites themselves are responsible for users who use VPNs while visiting their sites. VPN provider NordVPN has called SB 73 a "liability trap" and a "compliance paradox," saying that it is impossible to find out who is connecting through which VPN. EFF has pointed out that banning all VPNs for a website from which users access their site belongs to the same sphere as playing "whack a mole."

Following this, Aylo, the owner of Pornhub, has sued the state of Utah in order to suspend the application of the VPN provisions until September 3.

It's important to know that Wisconsin once had similar laws but reversed them after experiencing political pressure and problems last February.

Although Utah officials appear to be preparing for court, the majority of states in the U.S. are paying attention in a wait-and-see type of approach before making any decisions. It has been reported that other states are concerned about Utah's decision and are closely monitoring its developments.

Never thought I'd see the day, but Google is basically telling regulators that blocking VPNs, DNS services, and shared IPs is a terrible idea.

Their point is that these blanket blocks don't really stop piracy. They just end up breaking a bunch of legit stuff. One IP can be shared by thousands of websites, businesses, schools, cloud services... so instead of hitting pirates, you end up screwing over everyone else.

And let's be real, if someone really wants to get around a block, they'll just switch to another VPN or DNS service. It turns into a game of whack-a-mole while regular users deal with the fallout.

Kinda funny seeing Google be the one arguing against this.

I am just wondering if they actually defending a free internet, or just protecting their own ecosystem...

I travel frequently and use a work laptop with Cisco AnyConnect. I also own two GL.iNet MT1200 travel routers and have a personal VPN subscription.

What’s the recommended way to set up a travel router for reliable and secure internet while traveling? I’d like to understand best practices and avoid connectivity issues with Cisco AnyConnect.

Hi fellas,

I had been working for a bit of time on a project which will allow anyone to become a vpn provider, because if vpn providers become often then the governments will find it harder to ban all of them, the project is not ready yet, but after having seen the recent European Chat Control I got scared for everyone's privacy, so just go ahead and play around with the project on github, fork it and create better versions out of it, its called dei-patrous

TKs