Yes but isn't it suspicious that all your traffic goes to the friend's house and not to Facebook and Reddit? If you claim it is not a VPN does it mean your friend is providing illegal unlicensed hosting? That's even worse.

▲

malfist 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> does it mean your friend is providing illegal unlicensed hosting

Since when do you have to pull permits to put a server on the web?

▲

iAMkenough 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Split tunnel is a thing, and in that instance the platform required to comply (like a porn site) doesn’t have any way to see all your traffic to determine if it’s a VPN/proxy connection or not.

▲

codedokode 4 hours ago | parent [-]

If you cannot determine the traffic type, you can block it and wait until someone appears with proper documentation and explains what they were sending.

	▲	iAMkenough 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's what the judge agreed with: it's unreasonable to require you to block all Internet traffic with the assumption it's all VPN traffic until proven otherwise. Under Utah's law as written, a private business has to assume any single IP address could be operating a VPN/proxy.

▲

ranger_danger 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"Suspicious" is not illegal, and neither is hosting.

▲

5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

zen928 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Why would that be suspicious?