Nops, and I think that it’s a bad move to change their business model to be a VPN provider to a catch-all security related provider, also I only have the standard tie which don’t have the DNS, mail redirection or portmaster services.

Furthermore, my threat model changed with the struggle for the independence of Catalonia, it put the state as my main adversary, and making them waste their time and resources with multiple subpoenas is a plus.

I started using ivpn almost 8 years ago, and I believe the default setting back then was to not use accounts with usernames.

Some of the key reasons I chose it at the time were port forwarding (this service was later discontinued), its open-source F-Droid application, the ability to configure the WireGuard connection on my Linux machine without the application (I never tried it), its commitment to user anonymity (zero logs, payment methods, etc.), external audits, and the fact that it wasn’t based in an EU member state (ivpn is a Gibraltar-based company).

The last reason is that I live in the EU, which shouldn’t be a problem for those who don’t.

Since then, I haven’t bothered to check how the VPN industry has evolved. Thanks for the thorough answer.

IVPN is often cited as an alternative to Mullvad. Is there any reason not to consider it now?

Also, to block them in the firefox browser, you can also use the FoxyProxy extension, and use the proxy by patterns options to use a non-existant proxy for the domains that you want to block.

Edit to add config example:

You can use iptables to block connections, by example, using ufw the uncomplicated firewall:

# apt install ufw bind9-dnsutils  #  Install ufw and nslookup
# uIPs=$((nslookup reddit.com && \
  nslookup www.reddit.com && \
  nslookup redd.it && \
  nslookup redditstatic.com && \
  nslookup www.redditstatic.com) \
  | awk '/^Address: / { print $2 }' | sort -u); \
for uip in ${uIPs}; do \
  echo -n "${uip} " &&  \
  ufw deny from "${uip}" comment 'deny reddit.com'; \
  ufw deny out to "${uip}" from any comment 'deny reddit.com'; \
done;
# ufw enable
# ufw status numbered

deleted by creator

I strongly dissagree. Cannot be neutrality with fascism.

No, I didnt’t say that. I’ve said:

No, there is not an antifascist position on their statement. Only a ultracentrist position based on the reaction of their user base/market.

See the original paragraph:

I understand that they would have removed also the sponsorship of a feminist, vegan or antiracist that created discontent in their use base (by being feminist, vegan or antiracist).

No, there is not an antifascist position on their statement. Only a ultracentrist position based on the reaction of their user base/market.

Am I being to paranoid ?

No, you are not enough paranoid if you don’t have the same or worse concerns about games developed in western countries. e.g. five eyes alliance.