A yank without a yank

    • njm1314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Vpns or the next thing those same states are going to ban. It’s the obvious Next Step.

      • silasmariner@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Good luck with banning something that’s an integral part of most large enterprises’ internal security practices

        • frezik@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          52 minutes ago

          Normally, I’d agree, but these people are trying to fire aircraft controllers in the middle of an aircraft controller shortage.

          • silasmariner@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            21 minutes ago

            I think that’s a different kettle of fish. You try telling AWS (or perhaps more relevantly Palantir) they can’t use a VPN to gate access to internal systems and you’ll have a much bigger fight. And once it’s permissable in some contexts, then it becomes much harder to gatekeep it even in contexts that you do legally forbid, since you can’t just blanket ban it at ISP level. Of course, I suppose you could enforce that ISPs blacklist certain VPN providers, but… Yeah anyway it becomes too tangled once you’re beyond the legislation phase and enforcement becomes a nightmare is what I guess I’m trying to say.