This is a response (from a paranoid) to the post above by "Crocop".
Password Manager
They recommend "online" password managers like "Bitwarden", "1Password" or "ProtonPass".
I highly recommend against using any online password managers and instead use KeyPass XC or other Keypass versions.
Every service that hosts your passwords online can be hacked. Examples:
VPNs
The article linked by "themarkup" is a bad comparison because it only talks about the website of the VPN service and not the VPN service itself.
Ofcourse every website is filled with trackers and google ad javascript, that's sadly how the modern internet works. But how can you rate a VPN service only by it's frontfacing website and not by its VPN?
What a good VPN is depends on your threat model / use case.
Browsers
I am unsure what the "privacytests.org" website shows me.
It mentions that firefox doesn't have a "Insecure website warning", but when i go to an HTTP website it warns me that it is insecure. Does this mean the website is wrong?
What a good browser is depends on your thread model / use case again.
Brave and other chromium-based (=google) browsers help against "normal people" spam and ads.
If you are paranoid of 3 letter agencies i recommend Firefox, Librewolf, Mullvad, Tor.
One reason why chromium browsers (which google made) are less trusted: You can not be sure that they didn't put any backdoors inside it.
Google created an image format called .webp and the image format had an exploit / backdoor:
By simply viewing a picture you could've been hacked, so why trust their browser engine or browsers?
DNS
Why did the linked DNS article by privacyguides say "Encrypted DNS will not help you hide any of your browsing activity."? That is wrong.
You should always use encryption wherever possible, this also includes DNS.
What a "good DNS" is depends on the use case. If you want privacy then you do not want any logging of your dns activities.
This means that, according to the website linked, only the Mullvad DNS service should be used, because it doesn't log anything.
Ofcourse all of this depends on your setup and threat model.
If you use Windows then it doesn't matter what browser you use, you are "insecure". Using a different browser won't magically make you "invisible" or unhackable. You have to combine all methods with a strict policy to be able to be "truly anonymous" for everyone.
Please explain why we should use the services you advertised next time, simply writing "VPN: <3 random VPNs>" doesn't explain why we should use these 3 VPNs or why they are good.
Password Manager
They recommend "online" password managers like "Bitwarden", "1Password" or "ProtonPass".
I highly recommend against using any online password managers and instead use KeyPass XC or other Keypass versions.
Every service that hosts your passwords online can be hacked. Examples:
- 1Password was hacked:
- LastPass was hacked:
- Bitwarden "was hackable":
VPNs
The article linked by "themarkup" is a bad comparison because it only talks about the website of the VPN service and not the VPN service itself.
Ofcourse every website is filled with trackers and google ad javascript, that's sadly how the modern internet works. But how can you rate a VPN service only by it's frontfacing website and not by its VPN?
What a good VPN is depends on your threat model / use case.
- Scared of some random guy on the internet getting your IP? Any VPN is good enough for that, even a self hosted one (Wireguard)
- Scared of authorities in your country? Use Mullvad
- Scared of 3 letter agencies? Nothing can help you
Browsers
I am unsure what the "privacytests.org" website shows me.
It mentions that firefox doesn't have a "Insecure website warning", but when i go to an HTTP website it warns me that it is insecure. Does this mean the website is wrong?
What a good browser is depends on your thread model / use case again.
Brave and other chromium-based (=google) browsers help against "normal people" spam and ads.
If you are paranoid of 3 letter agencies i recommend Firefox, Librewolf, Mullvad, Tor.
One reason why chromium browsers (which google made) are less trusted: You can not be sure that they didn't put any backdoors inside it.
Google created an image format called .webp and the image format had an exploit / backdoor:
By simply viewing a picture you could've been hacked, so why trust their browser engine or browsers?
DNS
Why did the linked DNS article by privacyguides say "Encrypted DNS will not help you hide any of your browsing activity."? That is wrong.
You should always use encryption wherever possible, this also includes DNS.
What a "good DNS" is depends on the use case. If you want privacy then you do not want any logging of your dns activities.
This means that, according to the website linked, only the Mullvad DNS service should be used, because it doesn't log anything.
Ofcourse all of this depends on your setup and threat model.
If you use Windows then it doesn't matter what browser you use, you are "insecure". Using a different browser won't magically make you "invisible" or unhackable. You have to combine all methods with a strict policy to be able to be "truly anonymous" for everyone.
Please explain why we should use the services you advertised next time, simply writing "VPN: <3 random VPNs>" doesn't explain why we should use these 3 VPNs or why they are good.
