this post was submitted on 03 May 2026
1027 points (98.7% liked)
Technology
84413 readers
3831 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
You can call VPNs illegal, but you can't enforce it.
Neither is enforceable. You can theoretically detect VPN traffic, but you can't tell if it's commercial or not. Even the detectable part will no longer be true if you make VPNs illegal, as providers will work towards "indetectability". You can have a list of known IPs, but unless the entire world follows you in your ban, that is pointless.
That law existing is more of a demonstration than an actual law, as it is also unenforceable. Sure, you can have a list of known IPs, but that's definitely not reliable and easy to work around.
Most laws about the internet are unenforceable unless you simply turn it off. That's why piracy is still an "issue" despite it costing rights owners a gigantic amount of money and therefore not lacking incentive to deal with. That's why even China and Russia, who are trying to control their network as much as possible, are still unable to enforce their VPN restrictions properly. Even if the US turned fully fascist they wouldn't be able to enforce a VPN ban.
They are enforceable. In the first case they can ban transactions to the VPN and ban the website from all ISP's. In the second case they can just ban transactions to Mullvad and should Proton not comply with the ban to Proton too.
It's not about banning people from using the VPN, it's about scaring away the VPN providers.
There are hundreds of VPN providers. People looking to circumvent bans where VPNs are banned are not using mainstream providers. It's only enforceable if the VPN company is in a country that will care to enforce your ban. Most of them are not.
I'm trying to find a rebuttal to that but I got nothing, and it finally makes sense to me why the government isn't banning VPN's.
Currently most major VPN's respond to legal requests from the government. If the government chooses to ban VPN's, then people will change to VPN's that won't respond to legal requests. That would leave the government with less power to police the internet, not more.
Exactly, that is why authoritarian countries trying to exert absolute control on their internet are still failing!
There is even a category of VPN providers who (directly) collect absolutely no information from you and accept all kind of payment methods, some not traceable or at the very least not blockable. So even if they do respond to government requests... They have nothing to give.
Controlling the internet is a very delicate task and that's why laws are always tiptoeing around it. There is a sweet spot where you control just enough without inciting people to go pay shady services that you have zero control over