Well, it’s basically what Tor does, just with extra hops. So the vulnerability is still the same, but you’re trading off higher cost/lower speed for mitigating the risk somewhat.
Many VPNs (including Mullvad) do this “noise packets”/size hiding encryption thing. That’s good, but not unique.
That’s kind of what I meant. Implementing both of those things together on a VPN is unique AFAIK.
I would imagine if you could trust the entry node that would also mitigate a significant amount of risk, no? I’m not deeply knowledgeable on the subject just FYI
This feature is unique to nym as well, as far as I’m aware:
https://nym.com/mixnet
Well, it’s basically what Tor does, just with extra hops. So the vulnerability is still the same, but you’re trading off higher cost/lower speed for mitigating the risk somewhat.
Many VPNs (including Mullvad) do this “noise packets”/size hiding encryption thing. That’s good, but not unique.
That’s kind of what I meant. Implementing both of those things together on a VPN is unique AFAIK.
I would imagine if you could trust the entry node that would also mitigate a significant amount of risk, no? I’m not deeply knowledgeable on the subject just FYI
Ah, I see, yeah I’m not aware of others doing both at once. I do think it’s a decent security model.
And yep, the big deal is controlling entry+exit gateways. Trusting those will always be the fundamental risk point in VPNs.