…versus the 1-2GB of incoming traffic.
I used to live in a sketchy neighborhood. Without needing any warrants, the police still knew to keep and eye on the houses that had no snow on their roofs in the middle of winter.
Maybe these days are different. A few teenagers watching 4k streams or Twitch streaming can probably put out just as much traffic as an Arr setup.
Yeah, it’s a well known fact, us ISP network engineers are all stupid and we also act perfectly along the lines of the law in our private lives 😁
That’s exactly what I thought! Would you please tell the others who don’t seem to understand? Sometimes, people… Sometimes…
I dont even use a vpn :3
What’s the equivalent of a culture shock in this case? Jurisdiction shock?
Hahaha that’s fair. Scandinavia is the goat for user privacy :3
ISPs see data traffic in the petabytes; a few TB here and there is nothing.
Yeah, but from a single user? I’m not at all worried. I just meant that it’s probably not a typical traffic pattern.
Fair point. I like my ISP, they straight up don’t give a fuuuuck how much data their customers use.
Local fiber to-the-house deal, and the dude who runs it is an absolute turbonerd greybeard-in-progress. Fun fact, I pay more than I would for the same from Comcast, who is also in our neighborhood, because 1) Fuck Comcast. That, and I can have an actual network engineer from the company on the phone within a few hours; he even sets up the time and calls you, and is punctual. Hard to beat, honestly.
Sweet deal! My ISP says they’re all about privacy ‘n’ shit, but who knows. At least I have never had instability issues.
Blame it on the TV spying on you.
Nah, they likely see that all over the place with infected devices throughout people’s homes acting as bot farms.
Lol I didn’t even consider that. But you’re right. You mean like less tech savvy people who installed “m4lware remover x3000” and became part of a DDoS attack?
or random apps on their smart TVs and phones
and usually, the way non-tech people solve a problem like this is to just throw money at it … money like in buying a higher tier internet package because their internet was too slow.
Give those residential proxies something to work with!
I wish they knew how that’s EXACTLY the same thing as trying to extinguish a fire with oil 😂 With all due respect, of course 🙏
There are a lot of crappy routers out there that don’t even give you a way to monitor how much bandwidth each device is using.
They know. Unless you run some advanced stuff they can tell the packages match the frequency of torrenting.
Of course, but for all they know, I’m only torrenting Linux ISOs. Which is obviously the truth.
What does frequency mean in this context?
In any case, they could also run an AI and do pattern recognition to identify exactly what is being transferred. Too bad my VPN doesn’t yet provide DAITA as a separate package that can be installed on a router…
Size and timing of packets. Protocols generally have consistent patterns, so say always 6 packets with the last 3/4ths filled. Then some keepalive at regular intervals (i.e. tracker updates), establising new peer connections, …
Luckily this deep inspection is illegal for isps in the eu.Russia, China, and Iran are using the patterns to effectively block all normal VPN and proxy protocols. There, people need special tools that send fake packets, randomize timing, and split and group packets into different sizes. All of course decreasing speed and increasing latency.
For UDP you’d also usually reencode packets as http3 warp ones so it looks like a video call.
Then the other end needs the same tooling to restore the normal packets.Obfuscating it would be possible if necessary, but it’s better when you aren’t forced to maintain such an obfuscation stack.
Luckily this deep inspection is illegal for isps in the eu.
Luckily one of the most populated police states in Europe didn’t trick idiots into voting to leave the EU or anything…oh wait.
Cries in tea :'(
Said state was already a surveilance nightmare (even more so the digital kind) well before that as shown in the Snowden Revelations.
Obfuscating it would be possible if necessary, but it’s better when you aren’t forced to maintain such an obfuscation stack.
I’d be delighted if my VPN provider provided even an obfuscation layer that I could use on my routers, but alas…
For UDP you’d also usually reencode packets as http3 warp ones so it looks like a video call. Then the other end needs the same tooling to restore the normal packets.
Is this similar to when you mask it as webrtc?
Luckily this deep inspection is illegal for isps in the eu.
As per the GDPR or something else?
There, people need special tools that send fake packets, randomize timing, and split and group packets into different sizes. All of course decreasing speed and increasing latency.
Something other than DAITA?
For UDP you’d also usually reencode packets as http3 warp ones […]
Is this similar to when you mask it as webrtc?
Sorry I probably meant QUIC not warp. It is related, I think webrtc now usually uses quic, so masking as quic or webrtc are probably synonymous, but honestly I don’t know enough about the details to say for sure.
Something other than DAITA?
I know people in Russia are reporting Mullvad gets fully blocked, so I don’t think DAITA is enough. As @chimp@lemmy.dbzer0.com mentioned, Hysteria is more in the right direction, though in more modern iterations/forks and together with another layer of obfuscation.
I don’t generally like to shout out names too much, since popularity among those that don’t need the tools makes them more cracked down upon for people that do need them. So I’ll just say that for the less obfuscated but more responsive route via rtc you use an updated hysteria as the outer layer, containing a fully homogeneous encrypted stream from a tool named after a reptile.As per the GDPR or something else?
Mainly Net neutrality rules. Net neutrality just barely allows basic DPI, though it already heavily restricts what ISPs can actually do with that inspection. Wikipedia: EU net neutrality violations. Note that the 2007 case there happened well before regulations were strictened.
This seems really cool! Although, if I already use a VPN, the packets would’ve already exited the VPN node before they were routed to a hysteria insrance. If the normal route without a proxy is:
MyVPNRouter[WireGuardInterface -> WAN] -> VPNServer/Node -> "clearnet" -> destination host (and back in reverse)Then I don’t understand where and how I could place a proxy in a meaningful way. If I for instance ran in on my public facing, non VPN router, the decrypted traffic would be visible during the “hop” from the VPN to my router:
MyVPNRouter[WireGuardInterface -> WAN] -> VPNServer/Node -> "clearnet" -> MyHysteriaRouter[WAN -> http/3 masq -> WAN] -> "clearnet" -> destination host (and back in reverse)Unless I use hysteria to obfuscate right here in my LAN before even sending it out to my VPN router? Because then the protocol footprint/fingerprint wouldn’t be that of a torrenting protocol, but that of http traffic?
Torrenting client -> MyHysteriaServer[http/3 masq] -> MyVPNRouter[WireGuardInterface -> WAN] -> VPNServer/Node -> "clearnet" -> destination host (and back in reverse)And also perhaps for traffic that does not already use a VPN hysteria is a good obfuscator?
Please do forgive and correct any wrong assumptions on my part! 😊
I have yet to see anyone busted for torrenting media or programs in my region.
If isp’s spent all that time litigating users, they’d lose customers. Mind you, with the obvious shift to no hardware ownership and mandated software backdoors, maybe it will change.
It’s interesting: pro digital privacy advocates swear up and down that tor should only be used for whistle blowing or activism against authoritarianism, and pro media sharing advocates say that for is the safest way to share.
It seems to me, the more people are torrenting, the more tor traffic, the safer it is for everyone.
Better to torrent using I2P instead of Tor though.
0 peers (maybe 1 if I’m online)
