Apparently, the researchers contacted some VPN providers. Perhaps Proton is one of them.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    well, im not as im not using interfaces that are affected by the vulnerability (im using named, containerized network interfaces), but i appreciate the info!

    it was initially reported as ‘linux & android’ were not affected.

    i stand by my statement that this isnt about the VPN provider, its a client problem. so the question about Proton is moot.

    • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      I think by client you mean the device and operating system, which is correct to my understanding, but it’s confusing because ‘client’ can also mean the VPN client software which is often supplied by the VPN provider, and that’s what I first think when you say client. So with that in mind it sounds like you’re saying “it’s not about the VPN but the VPN software” which obviously comes from the same provider.

      I have not looked into it so you probably understand this more than I, but from the sound of it the VPN software can be built to detect, prevent or counteract the exploit even on affected systems? In which case, even though it’s an environment issue it can still be resolved by the VPN provider.

      • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        youre correct. its the local routing table that is vulnerable, which is usually handled by the OS.

        I had not yet heard of any mitigation techniques from the vpn provider side. glad to know they are assisting with this OS/client failure.

        • NeatNit@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          I have no idea if they are assisting, it’s all baseless conjecture on my part! Sorry if that wasn’t clear, I thought it was