You clearly haven’t done a lot of research then. Lots of VPNs have no logs policies, those VPN providers have been audited, and their claims of no logs hold up.
Take Proton VPN for example. They’re based in Switzerland. According to Swiss law, If you collect data, you must justify it, protect it, and be transparent about it. Proton wouldn’t risk their entire business on the assumption that they won’t be caught lying. Why do you think so many companies set up their headquarters in Switzerland?
You’re right about one thing. You still have to trust someone. A VPN doesn’t eliminate trust, it shifts it from your ISP to the provider.
The difference is that reputable VPNs are audited, operate under stricter legal frameworks, and have a business model built on not logging user activity. That’s a very different risk profile than “you can’t trust any of them.”
Think of it like this:
Your ISP is a glass car.
A bad VPN is tinted windows.
A good audited VPN is an armored vehicle.
A tank could still destroy it, but you’re no longer an easy target.
A lot of people exaggerate what VPNs actually do. They’re not magic, but they’re also not useless. They reduce risk, which is the entire point.
That’s basically a conspiracy claim with no evidence. Audit firms have reputations to maintain. Their entire business depends on credability. Plus many audits are public. If all audits were controlled by shadow buyers, every industry audit would be meaningless.
Your condom analogy only works if failure is guaranteed. With a reputable VPN, it isn’t.
You’re not eliminating trust, you’re choosing a provider with audits, legal accountability, and a track record instead of defaulting to your ISP.
That’s not perfect security, but it’s clearly not the same as “a poked hole.”
You’re referring to ground level policing and law, which sure, they keep things transparent for as intended. I’m talking about the under layer that isn’t petty that owns the police.
Like if you’re a welfare shmuck, no one’s interested in fining and ultimately jailing you because you will cost the system more than you’re worth. Now, someone making steady 6 figures has assets to repo if they’re caught dling Shrek 4, so they get the VPN. Now, however, something greater knows you’re willing to pay to keep your Shrek addiction away from ground level eyes. Might never bite in the lifetime, but might depending on what Shrek actually is. Someone always knows, its just a matter of what your vice is and who knows how much you’re worth.
You’ve shifted from discussing VPNs to hypothetical “higher powers” that aren’t relevant to normal users.
Sure, if you’re a high-value target, a VPN alone won’t protect you. But for everyday use, it still meaningfully reduces who can see your data.
Security isn’t about being invisible, it’s about reducing exposure. Dismissing that because “someone might still know” isn’t analysis, it’s just nihilism.
![[StBeals] Unhelpful](https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/bd40ae69-64c2-4942-a7c5-adee10e9b260.webp){kind=link}
You clearly haven’t done a lot of research then. Lots of VPNs have no logs policies, those VPN providers have been audited, and their claims of no logs hold up.
Take Proton VPN for example. They’re based in Switzerland. According to Swiss law, If you collect data, you must justify it, protect it, and be transparent about it. Proton wouldn’t risk their entire business on the assumption that they won’t be caught lying. Why do you think so many companies set up their headquarters in Switzerland?
And do you honestly believe there are no undernet layers to any of that?
You’re right about one thing. You still have to trust someone. A VPN doesn’t eliminate trust, it shifts it from your ISP to the provider.
The difference is that reputable VPNs are audited, operate under stricter legal frameworks, and have a business model built on not logging user activity. That’s a very different risk profile than “you can’t trust any of them.”
Think of it like this:
Your ISP is a glass car. A bad VPN is tinted windows. A good audited VPN is an armored vehicle.
A tank could still destroy it, but you’re no longer an easy target.
A lot of people exaggerate what VPNs actually do. They’re not magic, but they’re also not useless. They reduce risk, which is the entire point.
More like no condom vs a condom with a poked hole. Chances are lower, but information is always visible.
Plus whoever is buying that data, owns the agencies that do audits in the first place.
That’s basically a conspiracy claim with no evidence. Audit firms have reputations to maintain. Their entire business depends on credability. Plus many audits are public. If all audits were controlled by shadow buyers, every industry audit would be meaningless.
Your condom analogy only works if failure is guaranteed. With a reputable VPN, it isn’t. You’re not eliminating trust, you’re choosing a provider with audits, legal accountability, and a track record instead of defaulting to your ISP. That’s not perfect security, but it’s clearly not the same as “a poked hole.”
You’re referring to ground level policing and law, which sure, they keep things transparent for as intended. I’m talking about the under layer that isn’t petty that owns the police.
Like if you’re a welfare shmuck, no one’s interested in fining and ultimately jailing you because you will cost the system more than you’re worth. Now, someone making steady 6 figures has assets to repo if they’re caught dling Shrek 4, so they get the VPN. Now, however, something greater knows you’re willing to pay to keep your Shrek addiction away from ground level eyes. Might never bite in the lifetime, but might depending on what Shrek actually is. Someone always knows, its just a matter of what your vice is and who knows how much you’re worth.
You’ve shifted from discussing VPNs to hypothetical “higher powers” that aren’t relevant to normal users.
Sure, if you’re a high-value target, a VPN alone won’t protect you. But for everyday use, it still meaningfully reduces who can see your data.
Security isn’t about being invisible, it’s about reducing exposure. Dismissing that because “someone might still know” isn’t analysis, it’s just nihilism.