[00:02] Mulvad's co-owner made a controversial
[00:04] political donation. A US court has ruled
[00:07] border agents can search your phone
[00:08] without a warrant. And a little bit of
[00:10] good news from Apple. All this and more
[00:12] coming up in this week in privacy number
[00:14] 63. So stay tuned.
[00:36] Welcome back to This Week in Privacy,
[00:38] our weekly series where we discuss the
[00:40] latest updates with what we're working
[00:41] on within the privacy guides community
[00:43] and this week's top stories in data
[00:45] privacy and cyber security. I'm Jonah
[00:48] and with me this week is Nate. By the
[00:51] way, we're going to be ditching our Q&A
[00:53] section we normally have at the end in
[00:54] favor of answering questions just
[00:56] throughout the stream. So if you have
[00:58] any, no need to wait. Just ask away. We
[01:00] will be checking the chat here of course
[01:02] and also um our forum thread and our
[01:05] signal chat for privacy guides
[01:07] supporters. So any of those places uh
[01:10] yeah, let us know if you want us to
[01:12] discuss anything. Anyways, how are you
[01:14] doing today, Nate? I'm doing pretty
[01:17] good. Um yeah, I don't think I have much
[01:20] to to say. It's just it's it's been a
[01:22] surprisingly good week, I think, for me.
[01:24] How are you?
[01:24] >> Good. You know, I'm doing good as well.
[01:27] Uh, I was just talking to some people. I
[01:28] know you know about this, but this
[01:30] morning I booked all of my stuff for
[01:33] Defcon in a few weeks. Uh, kind of a
[01:36] lastm minute booking, which is how I
[01:38] normally handle things. Um, but that'll
[01:41] be exciting. So, if anyone is going to
[01:44] Defcon, it would be very cool to meet up
[01:47] with anyone. But otherwise, I will be
[01:48] doing that and I'm looking forward to
[01:51] it. I've never been to Vegas before.
[01:53] Have you been to Vegas, Nate?
[01:55] Surprisingly, no. Um, I actually spent
[01:58] uh 7 years in Southern California and
[02:00] Vegas was only a few hours away. But for
[02:02] the majority of that time, I was under
[02:04] 21 and a lot of people told me that
[02:05] like, yeah, there's stuff to do if
[02:06] you're not 21, but there's like and
[02:08] they're not even talking about gambling,
[02:10] which is like getting into places. Like,
[02:11] there's more stuff to do when you are
[02:12] 21. Um, so I just never really made the
[02:15] time. But that is really exciting. I do
[02:16] want to go to Defcon one day. So, I hope
[02:18] you have fun.
[02:19] >> Yeah. Uh, you should come. Hopefully we
[02:21] can do it next year or something a bit
[02:23] less last minute for sure.
[02:26] >> Yeah, that would be super awesome.
[02:29] Um but yeah, I uh I guess we'll go ahead
[02:31] and jump into this week's stories and uh
[02:34] cyber security stuff that you might be
[02:36] discussing at Defcon possibly. Who
[02:38] knows? But um we're going to start with
[02:40] our our big big story which is about
[02:43] Mulvad, the Mulvad donation controversy.
[02:46] So, um, for context here, uh, this
[02:49] actually came to light a few weeks ago.
[02:52] Um, I want to say like a month ago, uh,
[02:55] that the one of the co-founders of
[02:57] MolvadVPN named Daniel Bernston,
[02:59] Bernson, um, I probably pronounced that
[03:02] wrong, donated, uh, I believe some
[03:04] sources I've found said 5 million
[03:06] Swedish croner, which is a little bit
[03:09] north of 500,000 US to, I'm definitely
[03:12] going to pronounce this wrong, the Oreo
[03:13] party in Sweden. Um, according to
[03:16] Wikipedia, this party has been described
[03:18] as both left and right-wing. Um, but
[03:21] from what I can tell, they're largely
[03:23] considered left-wing. And, uh, this
[03:26] unfortunately this is relevant to the
[03:27] story. Um, despite being considered
[03:29] largely leftwing, the party apparently
[03:31] also has some significant uh,
[03:34] nationalist, populist, and conservative
[03:36] views. And one of the big ones that I've
[03:38] seen thrown around a lot that people are
[03:40] uh upset about is uh remigration, which
[03:42] is a term I've never heard before, but
[03:44] um the summary I found said it's a
[03:47] policy aimed at encourage encouraging or
[03:49] compelling immigrants to leave Sweden.
[03:51] Uh another summary said the the party's
[03:54] platform includes strong secularism,
[03:55] immediate closure of Islamic charter
[03:57] schools, and the assertion that Sweden
[03:58] belongs to the Swedes. Um, so again, for
[04:02] the record, this these are summaries I
[04:03] read and I have never been to Sweden. I
[04:07] am not Swedish. I don't think I know any
[04:09] Swedes um other than I think I've talked
[04:11] to some of the Molvad people for like
[04:12] two seconds in the past. So, apologies
[04:14] if I got any of that wrong, but that is
[04:16] what my research turned up. So, again,
[04:19] this um this story started about I mean,
[04:22] apparently this donation took place in
[04:24] 2025, but I guess it just came to light
[04:27] about a month ago. And um Mulvad has
[04:31] officially commented now because this
[04:32] has become such a big thing. And uh I'm
[04:35] just going to kind of pick out bits and
[04:36] pieces of this story because there is
[04:38] it's it's not a huge huge statement, but
[04:41] you know it's it's a little bit too much
[04:42] to just read off here. Um basically they
[04:45] said this is a private donation from
[04:46] Daniel to the individual. Mulvad or its
[04:48] parent and sister companies did not
[04:50] endorse and were not involved in it. Um,
[04:53] and then they kind of went on to
[04:54] basically say that uh, well, actually,
[04:57] let me scroll down a little bit here and
[04:58] read one more part. Um, Mulvad does not
[05:01] condone it nor condemn it. It was most
[05:03] likely a bad idea. Most things where
[05:04] there are a multitude of conflicting
[05:06] opinions necessarily are. I don't know
[05:08] about that. Uh, but societies need a
[05:10] great diversity of ideas, initiatives,
[05:12] and organizations who can be tested and
[05:13] sifted until the best ones remain,
[05:14] ideally through rational debate.
[05:16] Daniel's rationale and points of view
[05:18] can be read on his personal blog um
[05:20] which I'll throw up on screen real quick
[05:21] just so you guys can see it. Uh he has
[05:24] written quite a bit actually um about a
[05:28] number of his views both related to that
[05:29] party specifically and politics. Um so
[05:32] you guys can go read that if you'd like
[05:34] to. Uh just to clarify when I said I
[05:37] don't know about that they said the part
[05:38] where um most things where there are
[05:39] multitude of conflicting opinions
[05:41] necessarily are. Um, I mean there have
[05:43] been a lot of controversial ideas in the
[05:45] past that I would argue have stood the
[05:47] test of time, but whatever. Um, so
[05:51] basically they go on to say in this this
[05:53] post um to kind of summarize it, they
[05:55] basically say like Mulvad is
[05:56] nonpartisan. Um, their interest is in
[05:59] making a VPN and providing people with
[06:03] the uh the tools to bypass censorship
[06:06] and access information and communicate
[06:09] freely and privately. And uh they kind
[06:12] of point out like sometimes, you know,
[06:14] we we talk about this with um
[06:17] we talk about this with like um like
[06:19] encryption, like necessarily people
[06:21] unfortunately are going to use
[06:22] encryption to do bad things, but that
[06:23] doesn't necessarily mean that we break
[06:25] everybody's encryption, right? And
[06:26] that's kind of the same argument that
[06:28] they're taking. And um let me see if
[06:31] I've got it all down here. Um so yeah,
[06:35] Daniel, like I said, Daniel's got his
[06:36] own blog post over here. Uh, I'll be
[06:39] honest, I had a little bit of a hard
[06:40] time following his logic. I mean, it was
[06:42] it was a lot. And um, I tried to read it
[06:47] all and again, I'm not Swedish, so I
[06:49] think maybe some of the context escaped
[06:50] me. I also uh, if I can be a little bit
[06:52] sarcastic down here, he says, uh,
[06:54] disclaimer, the views in this text,
[06:55] while partially inspired by uh, the two
[06:57] who founded that party, are mine and not
[06:59] theirs or the parties. And it's like, so
[07:01] basically, you said, here's why I voted
[07:02] for the party, and by the way, nothing I
[07:03] said is what the party said. So, I don't
[07:06] really understand what he's saying
[07:07] there. Um, I kind of do, but I kind of
[07:09] don't. Anyways, uh, if if I read his
[07:11] blog correctly, he's basically saying
[07:13] like he doesn't really believe in that
[07:15] party, but he, again, could be reading
[07:17] this wrong, but he's kind of like trying
[07:18] to encourage competition. Like maybe if
[07:21] we have more
[07:23] viable party options, maybe the existing
[07:26] politicians will do better. Um, which as
[07:29] somebody living under a two-party
[07:30] system, I can say I kind of understand
[07:31] that logic, but I don't know how well it
[07:34] holds up. But yeah, I think that's uh
[07:38] I think that kind of gets us up to
[07:39] speed. Um I think I'm going to throw it
[07:42] back to Jonah at this point to kick off
[07:43] the analysis. Um Jonah, could you maybe
[07:46] start by kind of like why why has this
[07:49] become I think it's probably obvious for
[07:52] most people, but just in case anybody's
[07:53] wondering like why why has this become
[07:54] such a hot topic in the community, do
[07:56] you think? You know, I think uh well, in
[08:00] terms of why it became a hot topic, I
[08:01] think that the privacy community in
[08:03] general um is a fairly political
[08:07] community because obviously we are
[08:09] fighting for privacy digital rights. A
[08:12] lot of that has to do with not only, you
[08:15] know, getting privacy from big tech
[08:17] companies, but also having privacy from
[08:20] the government and making sure that the
[08:22] laws of um, you know, where you where
[08:26] you live are are protecting your privacy
[08:28] rights. And we talk about privacy
[08:30] policies and law um, on our forum and on
[08:33] this channel all of the time. And I
[08:37] don't think um any of the policies that
[08:39] this party has are specifically privacy
[08:43] related, although there are certainly
[08:44] some privacy implications with uh some
[08:47] of the remigration stuff that they're
[08:48] doing, which is a whole separate topic.
[08:50] But it's not surprising to me that um
[08:54] that people who have an interest in
[08:55] privacy are also going to have an
[08:57] interest in a lot of other political
[08:59] topics. And so it's definitely
[09:02] controversial because it's the sort of
[09:04] thing that is going to blow up on social
[09:06] media. Uh we've seen a ton of this
[09:08] talked about on Mastadon and on Twitter
[09:12] and I'm sure on other platforms where
[09:13] Malvette is as well. Obviously Molvad
[09:15] was feeling the pressure because they
[09:16] had to post a full response about it.
[09:20] And I think a lot of people just have
[09:22] questions about what it means for
[09:25] Malvet, especially if they don't feel
[09:26] like supporting these these policies.
[09:29] Um, and so we could take a look at some
[09:31] of the questions. We we've received
[09:33] questions just during this show already.
[09:35] Um, and some some statements we could
[09:37] look at. Uh, take out the lobster on
[09:39] YouTube said it's not really an extreme
[09:41] party. Uh, if that's what you're getting
[09:44] at, sincerely a Swede. I will say uh
[09:46] neither of us are Swedish obviously. I
[09:49] mean, maybe ancestrally, but not uh not
[09:54] living in Sweden. I have no familiarity
[09:56] with Swedish politics and and I assume
[09:59] Nate does not really either. Uh so
[10:03] I don't really know much about this
[10:06] party to be honest and they seem to be
[10:08] all over the map. I don't think the
[10:09] question is, you know, how extreme they
[10:11] are, but they do seem to be from what
[10:13] I've gathered and from what other people
[10:14] have said, um just a very populist
[10:18] party. uh which is the sort of thing
[10:20] where
[10:22] a lot of the times with these populist
[10:24] parties, they will have a lot of
[10:26] policies and say a lot of things mainly
[10:28] to get votes and support more than like
[10:31] actually supporting it. Um and they
[10:33] might not even believe any of the things
[10:34] that they're supporting. Uh or they only
[10:38] have certain policies that they care
[10:39] about. I think that this is a big
[10:41] problem with some parties that
[10:43] especially ones that are described as
[10:45] both right and leftwing like this one is
[10:46] like Nate was saying. Um because in a
[10:50] lot of cases when a party seems like
[10:52] they are
[10:54] kind of on all sides of the aisle,
[10:55] they're actually only supporting one
[10:57] side, but they want to get votes from
[10:58] anyone that they can convince.
[11:02] I don't really know um
[11:06] where I don't really know.
[11:10] I guess at the end of the day, his
[11:12] support for it doesn't make a lot of
[11:13] sense to me. He said in his own blog
[11:14] post that he doesn't really support many
[11:16] of the policies that this party
[11:19] supports. Um so I don't know why I think
[11:22] it was at the end there if you have it
[11:24] on the screen. Um but
[11:27] it yeah it doesn't make a lot of sense
[11:29] to me to become that party's biggest
[11:30] supporter but again I don't know how
[11:32] much this competition is really needed
[11:34] in the Swedish political space.
[11:38] Um, a lot of the questions that I've
[11:40] seen are more about like
[11:45] just how much of Molvad's money is
[11:47] actually going to the causes that the
[11:49] co-founder
[11:51] uh supports. And
[11:54] as far as I know, um, Molvad is
[11:57] basically co-owned 50/50 between him and
[12:00] and another person. Um, and they're
[12:03] co-CEOs and they kind of just split
[12:05] everything down the middle. And so it's
[12:09] I don't know Nate, you could probably
[12:10] elaborate more on this a bit, but in
[12:13] terms of like whether you should
[12:15] continue using Malvad or not.
[12:19] It's it's less of a like privacy or a
[12:21] technical decision and more of like a
[12:23] philosophical or political how you feel.
[12:25] At at the end of the day, like your
[12:27] money, if you support Malvad, some of
[12:29] that is going to be supporting these
[12:30] things that one of the co-founders cares
[12:33] about because he's getting the profits
[12:35] from from Mulvad, right? Even if
[12:36] Mulvad's not directly doing it, you're
[12:39] sending money that way, which is
[12:41] something to consider. But at the same
[12:43] time, you know, you can separate the art
[12:45] from the artist, and if Mulvad isn't
[12:47] directly supporting it themselves, it's
[12:48] just one guy who's profiting off of it,
[12:50] maybe that's less of a big deal to you.
[12:52] I don't know. What do you think, Nate?
[12:55] I think it's um I think it's really
[12:58] personal preference. Um real quick just
[13:01] to kind of go back to uh to what um Take
[13:04] out the Lobster said. Uh what I was
[13:06] getting at is basically just that I just
[13:08] wanted to I don't know if hedge my bets
[13:09] is the right word, but basically like I
[13:11] don't know a lot about this party. I I
[13:12] hadn't really heard of them before. So
[13:14] it was kind of my like I I wasn't trying
[13:15] to insinuate they're necessarily an
[13:17] extreme party. Um I was more just saying
[13:19] like I apologize if I'm summarizing this
[13:21] wrong, but um yeah, I think it's
[13:24] It's so tricky because I think both of
[13:26] those takes are true. You know, um Etu
[13:29] said here that he said in a real fight,
[13:31] nobody drops the best shield just
[13:33] because they dislike the creator. Um but
[13:36] at the same time, I think it's it's not
[13:39] quite the same. Like I see where you're
[13:40] coming from, and you're absolutely
[13:41] right. Like if I was in a firefight, I'm
[13:43] I'm going to use whatever protection I
[13:45] have available to to to cover myself,
[13:47] but it's so like
[13:50] I don't know. I think that's a valid
[13:51] take, but at the same time, I think not
[13:53] wanting to cuz when you're subscribing
[13:56] to Mulvad, you are directly putting
[13:58] money in this man's pocket. Like, full
[13:59] stop. You are period. Full stop. And so,
[14:04] you're giving money to him, which he
[14:06] then in turns around and gives to a
[14:08] party that may have serious like
[14:12] political things that you don't believe
[14:14] in. you know, if if he's talking about
[14:17] forcibly
[14:18] removing immigrants from the country and
[14:21] you know, like like maybe that's
[14:23] something you don't believe. Maybe I
[14:24] mean, like my wife is Hispanic. I don't
[14:26] like people I'm I'm just going to say it
[14:28] here in the US. I don't like people who
[14:30] have that whole like, oh, we need to
[14:31] kick them all out. Like, you know, it's
[14:33] I don't know, man. I I think they're
[14:35] both valid takes is what I'm getting at.
[14:37] Like, if you're like, "No, it's the best
[14:38] tool we have. It's his money and I don't
[14:41] think we're going to find a better
[14:42] tool." I I think that is a perfectly
[14:44] valid take, but I also think it's
[14:45] completely reasonable that some people
[14:46] would be like, "Yeah, but my money is
[14:48] directly supporting him, which is in
[14:50] turn directly supporting them." So, it's
[14:52] basically like I'm giving money to them,
[14:54] but just through a proxy, and I don't
[14:57] want to give them my money. Like, I
[14:58] think that's also a perfectly valid
[15:00] take. Um,
[15:03] >> personal opinion, I think I would like
[15:04] to see in the community itself, I think
[15:07] I would like to see more appreciation
[15:08] for that. I think not not to like kind
[15:10] of be judgy and call people out, but you
[15:12] know this whole like you said uh again
[15:14] this comment um this MOAD drama shows
[15:16] how people confuse politics with
[15:17] engineering. No, like technology is
[15:20] political. I'm I'm kind of I don't know.
[15:22] I'm one of those people who thinks that
[15:23] everything is political when you dig
[15:24] deep enough and there's really no such
[15:26] thing as being non-political or
[15:27] apolitical. And so it's like I I think
[15:29] understanding that for some people this
[15:31] is really important to them and I think
[15:32] that's valid and just having that kind
[15:34] of patience that for some people they
[15:35] care, for some people they don't. So,
[15:38] >> and this is something that comes up a
[15:39] lot, I think,
[15:41] a most of the time when like people say
[15:43] that they're not going to use something
[15:45] that's widely recommended like Molvad,
[15:47] we see it with graphine OS for example,
[15:49] we see it with other project, we see it
[15:50] with Proton all the time where I think
[15:54] when somebody says like they're not
[15:56] going to use something for some
[15:57] non-technical reason, there's a group of
[15:59] people who get mad that they're doing
[16:01] that and that they're not using it,
[16:02] which is a reaction that doesn't make a
[16:04] lot of of sense to me. Like if somebody
[16:08] isn't going to use Malvette because of
[16:09] this, I don't think there needs to be a
[16:11] whole argument about why, you know, the
[16:14] the politics and how how this doesn't
[16:16] actually matter because Malvet is still
[16:17] secure. Like it's fine if you don't want
[16:19] to financially support this sort of
[16:22] thing. Um,
[16:25] but yeah, just just kind of an annoying
[16:28] thing that's I've seen in the community
[16:30] beyond uh beyond Malt stuff. I would say
[16:34] the other thing I wanted to point out
[16:36] really quick, I did see a lot of
[16:37] comments in the community basically
[16:39] talking about
[16:42] the potential privacy implications for
[16:44] some of these policies. The remigration
[16:45] one in particular, it does call into
[16:47] question um a lot of privacy concerns
[16:52] about how those people would be found in
[16:54] Sweden, for example, and how they are,
[16:56] you know, determining who needs to stay
[16:58] and who's going to leave. What metrics
[16:59] are they using? Obviously, here in the
[17:01] United States, we've seen a lot of news
[17:03] about ICE, for example, and how they're
[17:06] using facial recognition everywhere, and
[17:07] they all have these apps on their phones
[17:08] that they can scan people with, and all
[17:10] of this data is being collected into
[17:12] databases. All of those immigration
[17:15] policies and some of the stuff that this
[17:17] party is supporting can directly have
[17:20] privacy implications for people living
[17:22] in Sweden. And obviously we've seen
[17:26] already, maybe it's not obvious, but in
[17:27] in the US, people who are not targeted
[17:31] by these policies, like American
[17:32] citizens
[17:34] who were born here in in whatever um
[17:40] are are also swept up in in these
[17:43] privacy invasive things that the
[17:44] government is doing. And it's very
[17:47] possible that if policies like this were
[17:50] implemented in Sweden, a similar sort of
[17:51] thing would happen where, you know, it's
[17:53] not only going to be targeting illegal
[17:56] immigration, but also it's going to
[17:58] sweep up uh Swedish citizens into this
[18:02] this whole immigration system. And a lot
[18:04] of people, I think, will probably be
[18:07] opposed to that just from a privacy
[18:09] perspective as well. I did see a lot of
[18:10] comments about that on the forum. So, I
[18:12] did want to bring it up because I do
[18:14] think a lot of people are saying like,
[18:16] "Well, there's no privacy implications
[18:17] at all." So, if you only care about
[18:19] privacy, it doesn't matter too much,
[18:22] right?
[18:25] Um, yeah, I mean, there's a
[18:28] >> there's so many questions and comments
[18:30] on this one. Um, let's take a couple
[18:32] from Jordan's been relaying some from
[18:34] the Signal chat.
[18:35] >> Yeah.
[18:35] >> Um, let's start with some of these. So,
[18:38] uh, how is the co-owner? I think you
[18:40] answered this. How is the Conor invested
[18:41] in Molad financially if I pay for Molvad
[18:43] and what way I pay him? Well, first of
[18:45] all, um I think you said there are 50/50
[18:47] owners, but also like I want to point
[18:50] out he draws a paycheck
[18:52] >> directly. That's my understanding. So
[18:55] >> I I don't know how that aspect of it
[18:57] works because you know there's when you
[18:59] own a company and Molv is a private
[19:01] company so like all of this stuff is not
[19:02] going to be it doesn't have to be
[19:04] disclosed basically but when you own a
[19:06] company you can take a paycheck or a
[19:08] salary for like all of the actual work
[19:10] that you're doing. But then if you're an
[19:11] owner you can also take profit sharing
[19:13] which is usually quite a lot more. It's
[19:16] why you see like all these billionaires
[19:18] who are like my salary is a dollar
[19:20] because uh they they just get all of
[19:22] their money via other means so they
[19:24] don't need to pull an actual salary. So
[19:25] I'm sure he takes a salary and like
[19:27] normal income but in terms of what he
[19:29] could be getting beyond that um I would
[19:32] imagine it could be up to 50% of the
[19:35] profits. I don't know who else is
[19:36] entitled to to get that money outside of
[19:38] Malvet, but um could potentially be
[19:42] quite a bit of support.
[19:45] Yeah, I know this isn't really the
[19:46] point, but just to throw that out there.
[19:47] That's also it goes the other way, too.
[19:49] Sometimes you'll see like, oh, this CEO
[19:50] is making like $15 million a year, and
[19:53] it's like, well, they're actually making
[19:55] less than that, but when you include all
[19:57] the stock options and this, that, and
[19:58] the other, which for the record, they're
[19:59] still making a disgusting amount in not
[20:01] literally disgusting, but they're still
[20:03] making a crap ton of money in raw liquid
[20:05] cash. But yeah, it's usually it's not
[20:07] $15 million in liquid cash. It's like
[20:10] some million in liquid cash and then the
[20:12] rest is stock options and stuff. But I I
[20:14] don't know if Mulvad works the same way,
[20:15] but I digress.
[20:17] Um,
[20:19] so yeah, uh, here's a fun one from
[20:22] Signal again. What were the relevant
[20:23] statements and actions the Molvad
[20:24] company took to distance themselves from
[20:26] that and prevented in the future? Uh,
[20:27] none really to be totally honest. If you
[20:30] I mean, if you read this this um
[20:32] statement, it it very specifically says
[20:34] that like
[20:36] the they're um I don't even know how to
[20:38] summarize it to be totally honest, but
[20:40] they didn't condemn it. They didn't
[20:42] endorse it. They just basically said,
[20:44] "This happened and we don't care and
[20:45] we're just going to keep doing our
[20:47] thing." So,
[20:47] >> yeah, their position is definitely that
[20:49] they're not going to police what their
[20:51] owners are doing or what um what their
[20:54] employees are doing or what anyone is
[20:55] doing in their personal time. It's just
[20:57] going to be um you know, Molv themselves
[21:00] are not going to support things like
[21:02] this, but what people do with the money
[21:03] that they earn from MV is kind of their
[21:05] problem is is Molvad's position. Um
[21:08] there's a question on the forum and
[21:10] Jordan asked a similar question uh
[21:12] earlier in the chat uh so I can kind of
[21:14] cover both of them. Uh Jordan asked if
[21:16] there should be restrictions on
[21:18] executives making political donations to
[21:20] stop this sort of thing. Uh somebody on
[21:21] the forum thread asked at what point is
[21:24] it acceptable for an executive or lead
[21:26] developer to support something that
[21:27] could be deemed controversial.
[21:30] You know, at the end of the day, all I
[21:32] think all executives of companies that
[21:36] have customers like Molad are public
[21:39] figures whether they like it or not. And
[21:41] so all of their the things that they do
[21:42] in their personal lives and the personal
[21:44] choices that they make, they're going to
[21:45] have business impact. Um, and obviously
[21:48] this has had some business impact at
[21:50] Molvad because they had to speak out
[21:51] about it and a lot of people are saying
[21:52] that they're cancelling um because of
[21:55] the the co-owner's personal uh decision
[21:58] here. So,
[22:02] I mean, it's always going to have an
[22:03] impact. At what point is it
[22:04] controversial or should there be
[22:06] restrictions? It really just depends on
[22:08] the company. I think, you know, it's not
[22:10] unreasonable.
[22:12] I I was explaining this on the form uh
[22:14] in the form thread about this to
[22:16] somebody, but like it is fairly normal
[22:18] when you're dealing with public figures,
[22:20] whether that's an executive of a company
[22:22] or if you're like hiring an actor for a
[22:24] movie or something to have clauses in
[22:26] their contract or morality clauses that
[22:28] kind of restrict them from doing
[22:31] controversial things like this because
[22:34] it does have an actual impact on the
[22:36] business itself. It's not just a
[22:37] personal thing. So like that is
[22:40] something that Mulvad could do. But
[22:43] whether they should do that is another
[22:45] question entirely and it kind of comes
[22:46] down to what the company thinks is an
[22:50] acceptable risk. I mean it's not like
[22:52] you can mandate this and make like make
[22:55] it a law or anything. Um it's just it
[22:58] comes down to whether Malvad wants to
[23:00] accept that uh it's going to have an
[23:03] impact on their business. and it it
[23:06] seems clear from their statement that
[23:08] they are just going to accept that as a
[23:10] as just a fact of life for their
[23:11] business. Um, a similar story, I don't
[23:14] know how many people, maybe not a lot of
[23:17] people know about this, but I've I've
[23:18] read a lot about it because I've been
[23:20] looking for like merch and stuff for
[23:21] privacy guides and I see people talking
[23:23] about it on uh Mastadon, but a lot of
[23:25] people used to really like Sticker Mule
[23:27] for stickers and then their their owner
[23:30] turned out to be a big Trump supporter.
[23:31] So now a lot of people don't want to
[23:33] support that company mainly based on
[23:34] that. Um, so it's kind of a similar
[23:37] thing where like the the personal
[23:39] leanings of the owners of these
[23:40] companies is going to have a a
[23:42] significant business impact whether
[23:44] whether you or they like it or not. It's
[23:46] just how it is.
[23:50] Yeah. I don't um
[23:52] I don't I don't think I have much to add
[23:54] to that cuz I'm I'm with you in the
[23:56] sense that like I don't really know
[23:57] where that line should be cuz on the one
[23:58] part like they are public figures and
[24:01] and
[24:03] you're right about that stuff and and
[24:05] people are going to have those those
[24:06] reactions either way, right? I mean like
[24:09] it happens on both sides of the aisle.
[24:11] Look at, you know, Bud Light had like a
[24:12] a trans person as their spokesperson at
[24:14] one point,
[24:15] >> which was really weird to be honest for
[24:17] Bud Light. That was definitely off
[24:18] brandand for them. But, you know, it it
[24:20] happens on both sides of the aisle and
[24:22] but at the same time it's like as a
[24:23] person like I remember when I was in the
[24:24] military that was the rule there is like
[24:26] you don't do anything public especially
[24:28] in uniform like yeah go vote go do
[24:30] whatever but like you are not allowed to
[24:32] speak out publicly as a uniformed
[24:35] military member and be like I support
[24:37] Obama or whatever. Um, so yeah, it's
[24:40] it's it's
[24:42] I think that's where this whole like I
[24:44] think that's where a lot of the
[24:46] controversy is coming from is where is
[24:47] the line between like this person is an
[24:50] individual who has the right to support
[24:51] whatever ideas they want even if they're
[24:53] garbage ideas and you know where is the
[24:56] line between that and like well your
[24:58] your customers have an expectation of
[25:00] you and I think you made a really good
[25:01] point that like the company definitely
[25:03] depends a lot. I think if you're in like
[25:05] um if it's like some kind of nonprofit
[25:07] that's like providing legal assistance
[25:09] for immigrants and then they go out and
[25:11] donate a bunch of money to Trump, that
[25:12] would be super weird.
[25:14] But yeah, I don't know. It's it's tricky
[25:17] for sure.
[25:18] >> Kind of related to that. We had a
[25:19] comment uh kind of an opinion from uh
[25:23] Eidair. you hopefully I'm saying that
[25:25] somewhat correctly uh who said that
[25:27] voting with your wallet is valid for
[25:29] personal ethics but in threat modeling
[25:30] prioritizing political alignment over
[25:32] technical robustness is a trade-off
[25:36] um kind of two things I want to unpack
[25:39] here the one the first thing is simple I
[25:41] think with VPN companies in particular
[25:43] we got to understand that these are not
[25:46] zero trust technologies like you're like
[25:48] you're talking about you do have to
[25:50] trust your VPN provider and so this kind
[25:52] of thing does come into play because a
[25:54] VPN provider is basically like um an
[25:57] ISP. You're just shifting your trust to
[25:59] that VPN. You're not, you know,
[26:01] eliminating the risk involved with an
[26:03] ISP seeing all of your data. That's what
[26:06] we're pretty clear about on our site is
[26:07] the main use case for for a VPN. So, if
[26:09] you don't trust the VPN, there's
[26:11] literally no point in using it. And this
[26:13] is a trust question. Um but when it does
[26:17] come to zero trust things or things that
[26:19] can be more technically
[26:22] cryptographically proven uh you know I
[26:24] think there is a solid point here going
[26:25] back to what I was saying about um
[26:28] graphine OS for example or proton mail
[26:32] with with these sort of things there are
[26:34] guarantees there's inspectability so
[26:35] people can um like see what code is
[26:39] running on graphino it's open source
[26:40] people can see uh like proton is using
[26:44] end to end encryption so they can't uh
[26:46] read all of your messages at rest. That
[26:48] sort of thing is important and it and it
[26:51] does eliminate trust and I think when
[26:52] you when you can eliminate trust
[26:54] whenever possible which is ideally how
[26:57] all privacy products would work um then
[26:59] this kind of thing does become less
[27:01] important over time and it is more of a
[27:03] just a personal morals thing at at that
[27:06] point. I don't feel that bad about it in
[27:09] this case because there are perfectly
[27:11] good alternative VPN providers you can
[27:13] choose from. We have other
[27:14] recommendations on our site. Whether
[27:18] this is going to cause us to uh change
[27:21] our recommendations on our site and like
[27:23] stop listing all that, I don't think
[27:24] it's going to. And in fact, you know,
[27:26] despite how controversial this topic has
[27:28] been and how many people are posting
[27:29] about it, I haven't seen anybody really
[27:31] suggest that we do that. So,
[27:35] you know, you you can definitely
[27:37] separate it a bit. Um, but in the case
[27:40] of a VPN, I do think it's it's valid to
[27:42] be concerned about this at the very
[27:45] least.
[27:47] >> Yeah. On that note, I I did want to make
[27:48] sure that we pointed out that um not not
[27:51] trying to tell people what side they
[27:53] should take, but this is not something
[27:57] that at this point in time we have any
[27:58] reason to believe is impacting Moldad's
[28:00] actual technical product. So again,
[28:02] going back to that argument of like some
[28:04] people are like, I don't care. It's his
[28:05] money. It's his business. The product is
[28:07] solid. The product is still solid as far
[28:08] as we know at this time. And um you
[28:12] know, I think that's that's something
[28:13] worth noting. And uh kind of related to
[28:16] what you were just asking, somebody in
[28:17] the forum asked uh I'd like to know from
[28:20] the staff what they think of Mulvad
[28:22] versus other companies in terms of what
[28:23] they contribute overall. are they
[28:25] offering unique benefits not just in
[28:26] their current VPN where we know there
[28:27] are other good options but in terms of
[28:29] what they'd bring to development
[28:30] research privacy advocation etc. And
[28:32] honestly yeah kind of like
[28:35] I don't know how I feel about sticking
[28:36] up for Molad because I'll make it clear
[28:38] I don't agree with the the policies of
[28:40] this this party that he supported but
[28:42] you know they they ran a huge campaign
[28:45] all around the world to try and like um
[28:49] bring bring privacy more to the
[28:50] mainstream. I remember seeing Molvad
[28:51] buses uh when I was in Seattle for
[28:54] something last year and I saw the Molvad
[28:56] buses and I tried to grab a picture but
[28:57] they went by too fast. I was like, "Oh,
[28:58] that's cool. There they are." But, you
[28:59] know, they ran this big ad campaign. I
[29:01] think they've been I could be wrong, but
[29:03] I think they've been pretty vocal about
[29:04] being against chat control. Um, you
[29:07] know, they're they're very um
[29:10] I mean, you say research and
[29:11] development, they do a lot of innovative
[29:13] things in my opinion like these RAM only
[29:14] servers, their data service, things like
[29:17] that. So, like yeah, I think they are
[29:18] really innovative. And actually, there
[29:20] was one other thing I was going to point
[29:21] out. They're not unique. Um, I'm going
[29:23] to share this tab real quick. Uh, Jordan
[29:25] brought this to my attention a while
[29:27] back when we were chatting. There's a
[29:28] Medium post. Um, after Andy Yen went and
[29:32] like made some kind of proTrump
[29:33] comments, somebody kind of pointed out,
[29:35] and to me, for the record, I take this
[29:37] post with a little bit of a grain of
[29:38] salt because this person has never
[29:39] posted anything before or since. And um
[29:42] but you know they they point out that
[29:44] like uh Proton has historically donated
[29:48] to a lot of organizations that are not
[29:51] necessarily aligned with with stuff like
[29:53] that. And so anyways, my point being is
[29:56] like yeah, there Mobad is not the only
[29:58] company that's out there donating to
[30:00] good or or to I shouldn't say good or
[30:03] Mobad's
[30:04] putting this issue aside. There are
[30:06] other companies that are out there doing
[30:08] good things in the privacy space for
[30:10] advocacy and research and stuff like
[30:11] that. And I I wanted to tie that back
[30:14] into what you said with that question.
[30:15] You know, it mentioned like threat
[30:17] modeling and like yeah, you could go
[30:19] with I I would feel pretty safe saying
[30:21] that I think Mulvad is probably the best
[30:23] option right now in terms of privacy and
[30:25] security and a VPN, but at the same
[30:27] time, what is your threat model? Like if
[30:28] your threat model is so high that you
[30:30] cannot afford anything less than Mulvad,
[30:32] you probably shouldn't be using a VPN.
[30:34] You should probably be using tour or
[30:36] something like that. And but you know,
[30:39] Proton is still good. IVPN is still
[30:41] good. like I think there are still good
[30:43] options out there where for your threat
[30:45] model you don't have to sacrifice
[30:46] privacy and security to also still be
[30:49] ideological. So
[30:52] >> yeah and
[30:54] I I will add though on the other hand
[30:57] while there are companies that are doing
[30:59] innovative things just like Molvad I
[31:00] think there are probably companies who
[31:02] are doing or where their like leadership
[31:06] or employees are doing controversial
[31:07] things that you don't know about and
[31:09] haven't heard about. some of these
[31:10] things are kind of unknowable. Um, and
[31:13] so that that's what makes it hard, I
[31:14] think, to base your decisions around
[31:17] this. Like, I mean, now it's kind of
[31:20] proven that if you don't agree with the
[31:22] ethics of the situation, now you have
[31:24] proof that Mulvad is unethical in your
[31:26] eyes. Um, but you can never really prove
[31:29] that a different company is any more
[31:32] ethical than that because they could be
[31:34] making very similar donations uh behind
[31:36] the scenes that you just have not heard
[31:38] about. So that's why it's the sort of
[31:41] thing that it's it's hard to
[31:44] take as a huge factor when you're making
[31:46] like a purchasing decision, for example,
[31:48] in in my opinion.
[31:51] Yeah, for sure.
[31:55] Um I don't want to be too defensive, but
[31:57] I do want to point out Gay Cheese said
[31:58] both sides of the aisle. Bud Light as we
[32:00] support people, be yourself. The other
[32:01] For the record, that's not what I meant
[32:02] when I said both sides. What I meant is
[32:03] that both sides do things that alienate
[32:05] their their fan base. Um, no. I do not
[32:08] believe that both sides are the same
[32:10] personally. So, I just mean they both do
[32:13] things that alienate people. But I
[32:15] digress. Um,
[32:18] wow. We spent a lot of time on that
[32:20] story, but that is it's such a
[32:21] complicated story. It's just and it's
[32:23] again I want to reiterate in my personal
[32:25] opinion like I think both arguments are
[32:27] valid. If you're like Mulvad's the best
[32:28] VPN and you want to stick with it, go
[32:30] for it. But just be aware where your
[32:32] money's going and vice versa. If you're
[32:33] like, nah, screw these guys. I want to
[32:35] take my money somewhere else. Like I
[32:36] think that's cool too personally. So
[32:40] um was there anything else we wanted to
[32:41] add to that one before we move on to the
[32:43] next story?
[32:45] >> Yeah, let's let me just look at the
[32:47] questions quick. I don't think there's
[32:49] any remaining that we haven't answered
[32:52] at least about
[32:54] Molvad. So we can kind of move on. But
[32:57] if we missed any um or if we missed one
[33:00] in in Signal, feel free to send it again
[33:02] and we can look at it. Otherwise, I
[33:04] think it's probably a good time to move
[33:06] on to our next story here. Uh, before I
[33:10] talk about that one though, I want to go