ExpressVPN refuses to hand over your data in new Indian gov't rules. Your VPN??

[wilburbear]

ExpressVPN passes the test.

If your VPN has not said they will refuse the new rules of the Indian government, your VPN will likely being sharing your data.

Ask your VPN how they will handle your data under the new rules.

https://www.neowin.net/news/express...-government-removes-vpn-servers-from-country/

 

[nooby_mcnoob]

All the VPNs will do it, they just won't tell you.

 

[Specterx]

IIRC there was a court case in Turkey where the Turkish police seized some expressvpn servers, and found that there was indeed no logging information kept on them regarding user activity.

 

[VicBee]

Nothing wrong with government getting access to user data. In some countries of the world it's a matter of life and death.

 

[d08]

Nothing wrong with government getting access to user data. In some countries of the world it's a matter of life and death.

This is only true for some select western countries. Rest of the world uses the rules to jail political enemies and even prosecute people for making "offensive" comments.

 

[VicBee]

This is only true for some select western countries. Rest of the world uses the rules to jail political enemies and even prosecute people for making "offensive" comments.

Absolutely not. In India or Pakistan (both democracies), it's not uncommon for radical groups to plant bombs in markets or religious sites. The security system needs to be able to track peoples communication to avert such horrors.

 

[timesquare]

I don't like it much either, but when it comes to, let’s say, crime, I think such a measure is necessary.

 

[arthemy]

I don't like any restrictions on the Internet. VPNs do not always cope with this problem. That's why I prefer to use proxy servers. I buy them only on trusted sites.

 

[TheDawn]

Absolutely not. In India or Pakistan (both democracies), it's not uncommon for radical groups to plant bombs in markets or religious sites. The security system needs to be able to track peoples communication to avert such horrors.

I don't like it much either, but when it comes to, let’s say, crime, I think such a measure is necessary.

Radical groups, terrorist groups, and criminal organizations exist everywhere and there is always a justification to invade human rights and privacy for the safe security of all. And we even submit our private data willingly to the government and even to various institutions including online shops that we don't know who they are in order to receive service from them.

The issue is abuse. All the private data about ourselves that we submit to the government and to the various institutions are supposed to be protected by privacy regulations and not to be shared or sold to other third parties. But how do we ensure that our private user data are not being abused and used by the government against us just because it doesn't like what we say or do. Just like people, not all democracies are created equal. Just because a country is deemed to be "democratic" doesn't mean that persecution against dissidents or oppression against certain groups does not occur. How and where do we draw the line?

The issue is as much a political one as an ethical one.

 

[VicBee]

Radical groups, terrorist groups, and criminal organizations exist everywhere and there is always a justification to invade human rights and privacy for the safe security of all. And we even submit our private data willingly to the government and even to various institutions including online shops that we don't know who they are in order to receive service from them.

The issue is abuse. All the private data about ourselves that we submit to the government and to the various institutions are supposed to be protected by privacy regulations and not to be shared or sold to other third parties. But how do we ensure that our private user data are not being abused and used by the government against us just because it doesn't like what we say or do. Just like people, not all democracies are created equal. Just because a country is deemed to be "democratic" doesn't mean that persecution against dissidents or oppression against certain groups does not occur. How and where do we draw the line?

The issue is as much a political one as an ethical one.

Americans live in an anarchic bubble of relativism. Freedom to say and do as I please is bible stuff, and the consequences of it are obvious. The irony is, some call it the price of freedom.
From that perspective, Americans cannot fathom that people in other countries are willing to forego some freedoms and are actively requesting their elected governments provide a healthy and safe environment that they can thrive in.
I currently reside in Singapore, where various religious and ethnic groups coexist in relative harmony. There are no vagrants on the streets, no graffitis, very low crime rate, a city state anyone can walk at any time of day or night without fear for their safety. Singapore is strict and unforgiving for those who break the laws. You want to get high? Do it in Thailand. You want to openly criticize the government? Be ready to defend your accusations in court and face fines if proven wrong. You openly criticize other religions or ethnic groups? Go straight to jail and pay heavy fines. Not tolerated.
Singapore can be stifling to westerners like me, having to bite my lip from time to time and not vent out in public. My residency visa is always on the line if I or members of my family cross that line. But when I read the news from the US, I sure am glad I'm in Singapore.