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
        ·
        41 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
          1
          ·
          10 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.