Sonic.net

We do not have plans to implement an IPSEC based VPN solution at this time.

I'm still curious as to whether a VPN is really needed. Is there information that AT&T is indeed collecting our traffic data?

C7864578 wrote:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A

I've seen that but it's very outdated, from like 10 years ago. Is there evidence that AT&T are still data collecting today or that that room even still exists today? I can't seem to get any information on that. I even tweeted Mark Klein himself and he did not reply, probably because he no longer works there and doesn't know.

mediahound wrote:I've seen that but it's very outdated, from like 10 years ago. Is there evidence that AT&T are still data collecting today or that that room even still exists today?

My guess is rooms like that don't exist but data is still being passed onto the government in much more volume. With the documents Snowden has provided I would need evidence on the contrary and would assume the Five Eyes agencies are doing this by default.

Guest wrote:

mediahound wrote:I've seen that but it's very outdated, from like 10 years ago. Is there evidence that AT&T are still data collecting today or that that room even still exists today?

My guess is rooms like that don't exist but data is still being passed onto the government in much more volume. With the documents Snowden has provided I would need evidence on the contrary and would assume the Five Eyes agencies are doing this by default.

But evidence points to less NSA snooping these days since and because of Snowden's leaks, not more.

mediahound wrote:But evidence points to less NSA snooping these days since and because of Snowden's leaks, not more.

The UK is doing more and they're sure to be spying on Americans, sharing that data with the NSA.

mediahound wrote:But evidence points to less NSA snooping these days

Laughably wishful thinking.

In hopes of keeping this thread on-topic, here's a better place for discussing whether you think you need a VPN:
https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/

kgc wrote:We do not have plans to implement an IPSEC based VPN solution at this time.

I have an alternative proposal: an unencrypted L2TP link to the same network segment where your DHCP server or border router is, so that DHCP requests over it get a *.dsl.dynamic.fusionbroadband.com address, static IP customers can route over it, and in either case, IPv6 traffic over Sonic's 6RD server will work over it, graduating to working native DHCPv6 when you have that. It would also defeat AT&T's or others' QoS and not have any ports blocked. Over a dedicated link such as the FTTN accounts, the encryption doesn't really add any value and costs significant processing overhead, making it unsuitable to run on a home router, unlike simple L2TP. If it works well, maybe you can even deploy it inside your own CPE for FTTN accounts; AT&T U-verse customers are allowed to use any VDSL2 modem they want, just without support, and many do. How about it, folks?

danielg4 wrote:AT&T U-verse customers are allowed to use any VDSL2 modem they want, just without support, and many do. How about it, folks?

I'm not familiar with unencrypted L2TP tunnels but U-verse requires an 802.1x certificate in order to authenticate and use the network and they're only available in AT&T CPEs.