425
submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by LunchEnjoyer@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml

I am fully aware of what vpn services to use and not. I am not using Express VPN, I am simply doing research for a master thesis, when I came across these results from Express VPN. If you have any ideas or corrections, please let me know why a VPN provider would need to have access to these permissions.

Screenshot is from Exodus service, which let's you view what exactly perimissions and trackers each app uses. You can check out the results and the tool for yourself here: https://reports.exodus-privacy.eu.org/en/reports/com.expressvpn.vpn/latest/

Link to Image

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] winterayars@sh.itjust.works 168 points 10 months ago

Camera could be taking pictures of QR codes to make it easier to set up a VPN.

Bluetooth could be integration with things like Yubikeys for authentication.

Dunno if that's what they're actually for, though.

[-] BuddyTheBeefalo@lemmy.ml 65 points 10 months ago

Best practices would not require camera permissions to scan qr codes.

Scan barcodes

Android includes support for the Google Code Scanner API, powered by Google Play services, which allows you to decode barcodes without declaring any camera permissions. This API helps preserve user privacy and makes it less likely that you need to create a custom UI for your barcode-scanning use case.

The API scans the barcode and only returns the scan results to your app. Images are processed on-device, and Google doesn't store any data or scan results.

https://developer.android.com/privacy-and-security/minimize-permission-requests

[-] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 27 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I'm going to assume they didn't implement this because money. Their app runs on everything, from iOS to Android to Windows. Cost savings they likely just flipped camera permissions and didn't care about small edge cases like these.

With that said, Mullvad is a million times better, cheaper and doesn't require even an email or account creation to use. They created a system that effectively anonymizes the user before they even subscribe.

[-] Schmeckinger@feddit.de 3 points 10 months ago

5$ per month isnt cheap for a vpn.

[-] ekky43@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Expressvpn is about 10$ a month, so 5$ would definitely be an improvement.

[-] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 5 points 10 months ago

And that's with the 2 year subscription discount, which makes it $8.50 a month. Mullvad is a flat $5 a month. No subscriptions.

[-] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 10 points 10 months ago

To be fair, they didn't offer that level of granular control for a while.
If you're a company with development prioritization that makes it difficult to say "we need to take a few weeks of not working of things that make money to reimplement something we already have that works, because of best practices that don't make us any money" then it can be really difficult to make changes like that.

[-] Aux@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

You don't want to scan secure QR codes through Google APIs. You can be at risk of Google stealing the contents.

[-] uis@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago
[-] Aux@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

But you'll need access to the camera then.

[-] uis@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Doesn't it use IPC? So only separately installed barcode scanner needs camera.

[-] Aux@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

Mate, you need to give access rights to someone. The camera won't open magically. The reality is that it's safer to do everything inside your app, especially when you advertise security.

[-] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago

That must be a pretty new API, right?

[-] BuddyTheBeefalo@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago

Since 2015 it was possible with Mobile Visions API.

Now it's included in ML Kit

[-] GissaMittJobb@lemmy.ml 6 points 10 months ago

Wow, that's wild that I've managed to miss that.

Was it possible to run it sans-camera permission back then as well?

Thanks for letting me know about it, anyhow.

[-] pensivepangolin@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Well TIL; thank you for that!

[-] LunchEnjoyer@lemmy.world 17 points 10 months ago

Ah okay that might justify the camera permission, although personally wouldn't see the need to have that.

[-] TonyToniToneOfficial@lemmy.ml 35 points 10 months ago

Would definitely prefer to see it be an "as needed" basis, like ask every time

[-] bob_lemon@feddit.de 26 points 10 months ago

That is probably possible, since Android usually asks about that nowadays.

[-] Player2@sopuli.xyz 12 points 10 months ago

You can often just deny permissions and it will work fine, just nag you sometimes

[-] offspec@lemmy.nicknakin.com 3 points 10 months ago

I don't imagine express is wireguard under the hood but that's a pretty common wireguard configuration method.

this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
425 points (98.0% liked)

Privacy

31122 readers
504 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS