172
submitted 5 months ago by wuffah@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

Following the same legislative and narrative pattern as the EU for “Chat Control”, similar laws and rhetoric are now cropping up in the US. The narrative is “save the children from porn” but the action is censorship, mass surveillance, and the elimination of privacy on the Internet.

As of this writing, Wisconsin lawmakers are escalating their war on privacy by targeting VPNs in the name of “protecting children” in A.B. 105/S.B. 130. It’s an age verification bill that requires all websites distributing material that could conceivably be deemed “sexual content” to both implement an age verification system and also to block the access of users connected via VPN. The bill seeks to broadly expand the definition of materials that are “harmful to minors” beyond the type of speech that states can prohibit minors from accessing—potentially encompassing things like depictions and discussions of human anatomy, sexuality, and reproduction.

Wisconsin’s bill has already passed the State Assembly and is now moving through the Senate. If it becomes law, Wisconsin could become the first state where using a VPN to access certain content is banned. Michigan lawmakers have proposed similar legislation that did not move through its legislature, but among other things, would force internet providers to actively monitor and block VPN connections. And in the UK, officials are calling VPNs "a loophole that needs closing.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 31 points 5 months ago

Welcome to:

People's Republic of America

美利坚人们共和国

Long Live Chairman Trump

Maybe he reign a thousand years!

/s

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 26 points 5 months ago

FTFY:

Lawmakers ~~Want to Ban VPNs—And They~~ Have No Idea What They're Doing

[-] SeeMarkFly@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I know governments work slow but these guys are still trying to figure out if freeing the slaves was a good idea.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] tate@lemmy.sdf.org 23 points 5 months ago

Wisconsin already blocks access to all goverment websites if you use a VPN. I can't even check the garbage collection schedule for my town. I always thought it was this misguided concept that they thought only "hackers" would want to be anonymous. It seems they are really working for the data brokers, who don't want anyone to be anonymous.

[-] tuff_wizard@aussie.zone 2 points 5 months ago

Sounds like a good time to deploy a bunch of small raspberry pi vpn nodes at local libraries and other free wifi spots. I don’t know enough about ip to know if they can track you past that first hop

[-] Arghblarg@lemmy.ca 19 points 5 months ago

At some point we'll just have to tunnel IP over DNS, and then they can't block traffic without destroying the entire internet. Not that it'll dissuade them.

[-] floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 5 months ago
[-] Filetternavn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 5 months ago
[-] Emi@ani.social 6 points 5 months ago

This method actually has bigger throughput if you need to transfer lot of data.

[-] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 5 months ago

pingfs

Now that's something I must try.

[-] the_trash_man@lemmy.world 13 points 5 months ago

"Legislators Want to Ban the Internet"

[-] palordrolap@fedia.io 3 points 5 months ago

Well, no, it wouldn't. The bods that make these decisions still live like it's 1950 and dream of an authoritarian future of masters and slaves.

What good is The Google or The AI when you're sipping champagne up an ivory tower or out on the ocean being waited on hand and foot on a gleaming yacht?

[-] Tanoh@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

It will just be a few approved sites that you are allowed to visit, and just by chance those sites are the ones that pay the goverment the most! Those sites will have records in the approved DNS, that you can not change. Other DNS requests are blocked, along with everything else that isn't approved.

[-] Lemminary@lemmy.world 18 points 5 months ago

Lawmakers Have No Idea What They're Doing

Sounds like a headline for literally every issue regarding technology.

[-] Bunbury@feddit.nl 17 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Soooo… screw the network of a bunch of companies I guess, lol. I have to use my work’s VPN while working from home, but the way they set it up I also have to use it while working at the office. This is far from a unique setup over here. If this happens to be the same in Wisconsin I have some bad news for them.

[-] elvith@feddit.org 6 points 5 months ago

That's basically any modern network. There is no more trivial "inside our network" vs. "outside on the internet". Networks are segmented on a need-to-know principle. You can access some information from the public internet. Some other things can be accessed from the internet, but only on corporate devices, if your user AND device is whitelisted. And then you have one or more VPNs on top of that for more sensitive stuff. Also those VPNs may be "dynamic" in the sense that it may also be dependent on the user, device and authentication method what is currently accessible over that VPN connection.

[-] neclimdul@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

Also schools. My kids state issued laptops use vpns to connect to the schools networks as well as in a true irony limit what sites they can access.

It's actually so limiting it's nearly impossible to print the required assignments on a printer in our home but that's a different rant.

[-] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

Porn websites should just start blocking access for any lawmakers that are okay with this legislative garbage.

[-] nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 7 points 5 months ago

s/blocking access/releasing the viewing history of/

[-] goatinspace@feddit.org 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

They might be using onlyfans

[-] DaMummy@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

There's a genocide going on. It's not the porn degenerates, it's the moral religious people. Don't push this garbage onto children. At least wait until they're 25 and their brain is fully developed before you teach them that women are the problem, that little boys should be fondled by grown men, and that it's OK to commit a genocide against the people who pray to a different sky wizards than you.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 5 months ago

They understand what they're doing. They're treating the problem as a black box - they want to decide what you can do in the field where they are strong, making laws and rules as the (in their piss cockroach opinion) dominant apes in the crowd. They are breaking the technical possibility for you to avoid that. They don't see a problem with breaking it for everyone, because if some use they need as well is broken so, they can make an exception for themselves, it's in the domain of making rules too, and they can make punishments so gruesome that nobody will bother except for mafia and law enforcement, just like with heroine.

And the answer doesn't lie in protecting VPNs or making technical means to avoid them further, by using plentiful possible information channels in the standards comprising the Internet. The answer lies in dipping them face into their own shit and saying "don't do that again or I will kill you". Because it's a social, not technical, problem. It can be reduced to unauthorized people telling you what to do and you obeying.

[-] daggermoon@lemmy.world 6 points 5 months ago

Anyone know how to get started with Tor?

[-] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

TOR Wikipedia page - explains the key concepts and gives a link to the website so you can download the Tor Browser.

Tails (Amnesiac OS) Wikipedia page - If you want the real Fort Knox solution to browsing something or sending something without anyone finding out. It's more of a process than downloading Tor Browser, but probably the most secure option possible for browsing the web. (The OS runs everything through the TOR network, is only retained in RAM, and wipes the RAM clean during shutdown)

[-] MissingGhost@lemmy.ml 5 points 5 months ago

You can do whatever you want on i2p. Nobody knows who you are.

[-] BlackJerseyGiant@lemmy.world 5 points 5 months ago

Next on the list for a ban. They came for my neighbors ID, and I said nothing, then they came for my neighbors VPN, and an I did nothing, and now they are coming for me on I2P, and there is no one left to speak for me...

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

I thought L2P was just for torrents. How do I use it with my internet connection? Does it cost money?

[-] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 months ago

If this passes I will simply add Wisconsin to my growing list of banned US states from accessing my website. That's assuming it's not already on there.

[-] goatinspace@feddit.org 3 points 5 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] shalafi@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

My IT experience is fading fast so can anyone explain this bit?

block the access of users connected via VPN

I'm running a Digital Ocean droplet on the other side of the Pond with my own, static IP. How could a site detect I'm using a VPN? Imgur blocks me if it's on. How do they know?!

[-] Godort@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 months ago

Generally, they know you're using a VPN because of where your traffic is coming from.

They probably block Digital Ocean's IP pool as a whole as it's often a hub for cybercrime and it would only affect a fraction of users.

[-] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 7 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

The thing is, VPNs won’t protect your privacy much. Browser fingerprinting technology has achieved its goal. True anonymity online is damn near impossible now.

VPNs are able to help circumvent authoritarian bullshit by making the traffic appear to come from somewhere else. So states that implement laws banning what is essentially protected speech aren’t able to really be effective in their efforts because the people that live there just route their traffic outside the state the have it all bounced back in. Banning VPNs would help them censor anything they consider porn.

That’s the real danger. A teenager jerking off is not the concern. It’s the excuse.

I wonder, what if we end run this with the cheap GPUs about to hit the market once the AI bubbles pop? Just set up a bunch of Remote Desktop instances people log in to pull shit up on and stream that to the browser. When they disconnect, nuke the container and pull the instance up again, route everything again. It’s basically Netflix of a remote session. And if they ban that, it would invoke the wrath of some incredibly powerful industries.

All because naked people are scary.

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

The thing is, VPNs won’t protect your privacy much. Browser fingerprinting technology has achieved its goal. True anonymity online is damn near impossible now.

except for traffic that does not come from a web browser at all. like API calls to download linux ISOs.

[-] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago

Linux distros are incredibly dangerous for children. They teach them they have options. It’s incredibly dangerous. We much protect them. For the ~~children~~ shareholders

[-] Tanoh@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

There are lots of companies selling data, just one of them is a list of known VPN IP addresses. Updated every X days. Just plug that into your service and it gets a lot harder, but still not impossible, to use with a VPN.

[-] Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Ok, so basically when your computer uses a VPN it just connects to a VPN server over the Internet using an encrypted TCP/IP or UDP/IP connection. On your computer side all your connections to the Internet just get shoved into that encrypted tunel instead of going directly into the whole wide world from your own network connection - so nobody but that server sees those connections - whilst on the VPN server side they're recieved from that encrypted tunel and then exit to the whole wide world from that VPN server as if they're connections initiated by that server not by your own machine, so to the whole world they look like connections coming from the VPN server machine.

Nations with nation-wide firewalls can try and block VPN by blocking the actual encrypted network connections to VPN servers (there are ways to recognize those, but there also ways to disguise them), but for websites to block them (which is what this legislation demands) the websites have to block the actual VPN servers since the websites can only see connections to them which seem to originate in those servers, not traffic elsewhere on the Internet such as the encrypted connections from VPN customers to VPN servers.

Now, there are lists of the IP addresses of the exist points of VPN providers, which are the IP addresses were the traffic of somebody using that VPN enters the Internet, so to try to comply with this legislation those sites would start by blocking all traffic from any of those IP addresses - remember those websites don't know were the traffic coming from a VPN server to that website really comes from, so they can't tell traffic from people in Wisconsin from traffic from people elsewhere hence have to block everything to catch everybody from Winsonsin.

This would affect everybody anywhere in the World using those exit points of those VPN providers since those sites can't really tell where exactly in the World is somebody whose traffic is coming from those VPN exit points.

Then there's the problem that the legislation applies to all VPNs, not just commercial VPN providers, meaning that the websites would also theoretically have to block VPN servers from business VPNs (and given how the networks of many large companies work, that might mean blocking the entire company) as well as thing like schools using VPNs and, even more entertaining, VPNs set up by individuals by, for example, renting a Virtual Private Server and installing a Linux there running their own VPN server or even installing the VPN server software on something like Amazon AWS or Microsoft Azure, which mean they might have to block every single IP address of any provider of VPS servers anywhere in the World (as any Wisconsian could, theoretically, over the Internet rent a chea VPS in, say, Malasia, and install a Linux with a VPS server there) as well as of all AWS and Azure servers since again any Wisconsian could theoretically run their own personal VPS server there.

So this legislation is totally insane in several ways.

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

How the fuck do they plan on monitoring VPN traffic? Isn't the whole point of a good privacy-oriented VPN is that they don't log traffic? How can they monitor something that doesn't exist?

[-] deathbird@mander.xyz 2 points 5 months ago

It's not the logs or the data which they would be monitoring with an encrypted no-logs VPN. What they would be monitoring, presumably, would be the fact that you are using a VPN at all. That's also what they would be trying to block. They might try to block it by interfering with access to certain ports or blocking certain IP addresses, but there would be limits. Even China can't stop all VPN traffic to get around its firewalls.

[-] Psythik@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

That's not what the article summary is saying, though. To clarify my question, I'm referring to this part:

If it becomes law, Wisconsin could become the first state where using a VPN to access certain content is banned.

How are they going to enforce that? Assuming the VPN provider is doing their due-diligence, they have no way of knowing what kind of traffic is going through a privacy-based VPN when someone uses one.

[-] hroderic@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

It’s an age verification bill that requires all websites distributing material that could conceivably be deemed “sexual content” to both implement an age verification system and also to block the access of users connected via VPN.

They intend to make the websites enforce it.

[-] neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Ok, so don’t use a vpn, just go to a proxy running in another country that is connected to a vpn?

[-] mosthated@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

So, I won't be able to VPN into my university's network right?

[-] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago

They'd have to exclude sanctioned VPN traffic, or the entire financial system doesn't work at all.

[-] SkaveRat@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 5 months ago

illegal VPNs just need to set the Evil Bit, so legit traffic and be properly allowed

[-] acosmichippo@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

or pretty much all remote IT work.

[-] Railcar8095@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

My home network is all under Mullvad for a few months now, and I've noticed that recently a lot of pages block it. I just get a 403 error and I need to disable it to access. Honestly I expect this to happen more and more, which is BS.

[-] mazzilius_marsti@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

these people deserve a big FUCK YOU to the face, in front of an audience.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
172 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

84324 readers
202 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS