I often use Opera browser's free proxy they offer for basic browsing or blocked sites. They advertise it as a free VPN but it's merely a proxy. As far as I know, it's unlimited traffic and you can choose the region it connects to.
Edge also has some Microsoft VPN with a very small amount of bandwidth for the free tier.
I'm fine with this kind of stuff as long as people are aware it doesn't offer the same connectivity as a full paid VPN.
As another Firefox user, I much prefer modern browser-centric solutions like iCloud Relay over VPNs, which seems like the wrong layer for what I'm using them for both in terms of implementation complexity and achievable privacy.
Happy to see that this solution is apparently using MASQUE, which is what iCloud Private Relay is also based on!
I usually defend Mozilla with these things, but I'm a bit bearish on this. It's not like they're not relying on big partnerships already for their survival. I don't have a problem with free to long as there is a paid plan, which I don't see on their announcement page. I don't care who is running a free-only VPN is a huge red flag, and I am one of those people that recommends using VPN services instead of running your thing on a VPS or something.
What worries me is this will get adoption and they're start talking about profiting from it via "differential privacy"
Or, even worse for the web is a more realistic problem: Firefox is notoriously hard to manage in an enterprise fleet. Their biggest hurdle to marketshare is just that, chrome works well with windows, linux and mac a like and lends itself to management. I'm frequently fighting to be allowed to use Firefox already personally. This poses a direct threat to enterprise security policies. Anyone who bans random free vpns in their networks, now has to include Firefox to that list. And I don't need to mention how bad that is for the web given Google will effectively be the gatekeeper of the entire internet, even the tiny marketshare Mozilla has will be crushed. I wonder if in retrospect, this seemingly mundane feature would be the death-blow to the only alternative browser ecosystem.
that would be amazing, without GPO or Intune manageability it's very hard to use in those environments.
Are you aware of Chrome Enterprise, it offers nice things like logging safe browsing hits, or TLS error page events (and when users navigate through one). it helps both IT and IT security manage their environment.
Free VPN's are usually funded by agreeing to route some VPN traffic for other people though your own network. They basically work as mixers, randomizing traffic throughout the VPN population.
This can expose users to legal risks, but but can also add plausible deniability at the same time "it wasn't me, it was someone on VPN".
As I understand it, it is just like in Opera. So a proxy not a VPN. I honestly find it distasteful that they may call it a VPN without it actually being one.
You know what would be actually cool and a transformative improvement? Mozilla to make an iOS port of Firefox and publish it in regions where Apple has been forced to allow it.
There used to be (is?) a Mozilla Web XR viewer app, which is a web browser with some experimental features enabled (tailored towards XR/VR as the name implies). Wonder if this is still Safari under the hood?
These "official" privacy features tend to end up being hollow masquerades when the providers inevitably capitulate to other corporations and authoritarian countries.
Like Apple's iCloud Private Relay not working in China, UAE/Dubai etc. or letting Facebook and TikTok secretly track you across devices and reinstalls with their iCloud Keychain API
They WILL leak our shit to the highest bidder or the biggest stick
FireFox need to improve their integrations and offerings to be on par with Chrome at this stage. It, at times can be such a bainful browser to use and honestly I don't think a VPN is the next step. Improved account handling & switching would be huge.
There's an oft repeated claim about "Modern Browsers are some of the most complex projects"
Yeah no shit, when you have browser vendors shipping features that have no place in browser, it's hardly surprising.
Why does a browser need screen sharing built in? Why does it need a vpn client?
You know there's a fucking operating system running under the browser that can run those things without worrying about how they impact on a fucking browser, right?
40 comments
[ 0.30 ms ] story [ 73.0 ms ] threadEdge also has some Microsoft VPN with a very small amount of bandwidth for the free tier.
I'm fine with this kind of stuff as long as people are aware it doesn't offer the same connectivity as a full paid VPN.
Also, "free": "If you're not paying for it, you're the product being sold"
Happy to see that this solution is apparently using MASQUE, which is what iCloud Private Relay is also based on!
What worries me is this will get adoption and they're start talking about profiting from it via "differential privacy"
Or, even worse for the web is a more realistic problem: Firefox is notoriously hard to manage in an enterprise fleet. Their biggest hurdle to marketshare is just that, chrome works well with windows, linux and mac a like and lends itself to management. I'm frequently fighting to be allowed to use Firefox already personally. This poses a direct threat to enterprise security policies. Anyone who bans random free vpns in their networks, now has to include Firefox to that list. And I don't need to mention how bad that is for the web given Google will effectively be the gatekeeper of the entire internet, even the tiny marketshare Mozilla has will be crushed. I wonder if in retrospect, this seemingly mundane feature would be the death-blow to the only alternative browser ecosystem.
Are you aware of Chrome Enterprise, it offers nice things like logging safe browsing hits, or TLS error page events (and when users navigate through one). it helps both IT and IT security manage their environment.
This can expose users to legal risks, but but can also add plausible deniability at the same time "it wasn't me, it was someone on VPN".
Could they please stop integrating services into Firefox? Thank you.
Sadly no countries are mentioned where such VPN is really needed (due to strict internet censorship).
Like Apple's iCloud Private Relay not working in China, UAE/Dubai etc. or letting Facebook and TikTok secretly track you across devices and reinstalls with their iCloud Keychain API
They WILL leak our shit to the highest bidder or the biggest stick
Yeah no shit, when you have browser vendors shipping features that have no place in browser, it's hardly surprising.
Why does a browser need screen sharing built in? Why does it need a vpn client?
You know there's a fucking operating system running under the browser that can run those things without worrying about how they impact on a fucking browser, right?