this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2025
627 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

72235 readers
2897 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
L4s@hackingne.ws
627
Supreme Court to decide whether ISPs must disconnect users accused of piracy (arstechnica.com)
submitted 1 day ago by tonytins@pawb.social to c/technology@lemmy.world
156 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cupcakezealot@piefed.blahaj.zone 3 points 21 hours ago (2 children)

i just use mullvad on my router and port forward directly there

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

And how do users connect to your port if your VPN-WAN doesnt have a port forward?
Same problem at a different point in the connection.

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

That still won’t work. Either the forwarded port is getting blocked by Mullvad (which is bad) or you’re bypassing Mullvad to use the forwarded port (which is really bad). You’ve essentially roped yourself into a double-NAT situation, where your router has a forwarded port but the router behind yours (the VPN server, which you have no control over) doesn’t.