Wangle VPN/Data App Pre-Release - 12 Months Free Subscription

140

Go to Deal

LThrallsman on 07/10/2016 - 17:40 wan.gl (670 clicks)
Last edited 22/10/2016 - 07:28 by 1 other user

Registering for the Wangle App prior to release (October the 14th) will grant 12 months free subscription. The app promises:

1. Wangle lets you monitor your connection speed and allows you to see how our technology has performed on all your favourite apps.
2. Our patent pending technology helps reduce your data consumption, saving you time and money.
3. We optimise your data before sending it across our private network, so you have an added layer of encryption and privacy.
4. You'll notice the decrease in time to download or stream your favourite content, greatly enhancing your user experience.

Related Stores

wan.gl

• 

  Feeblely on 07/10/2016 - 18:09

  +1

  is this a free vpn?

  • 

    Suspect420 on 08/10/2016 - 00:57

    Yes. Free for first 12 months if you sign up before release.

• 

  BigLeviathan on 07/10/2016 - 18:17

  +1

  Can this be used for Netflix multiple regions?

  • 

    Suspect420 on 08/10/2016 - 00:57

    Can be used to reduce all data no matter the source

• 

  CapeFin on 07/10/2016 - 18:44

  +1

  Free for 12 months if you register before October 14th

• 

  chav on 07/10/2016 - 19:35

  +2

  Will you promise not to sell all my Internet traffic to the Russian Bratva

  • 

    Suspect420 on 08/10/2016 - 00:59

    You should look into who they are.
    Australian listed public company on the ASX.

    Highly doubt they would deal in illegal activity.

    • 

      tobi3421 on 08/10/2016 - 02:42

      +1

      Out of curiosity, are you a shareholder of WGL? 😜

      • 

        Suspect420 on 08/10/2016 - 08:36

        +1

        Lol i am! Only reason i know about it 😀

      • 

        tobi3421 on 08/10/2016 - 13:48

        +1

        @BKZ:
        Good luck with your investment! Watched the rise from 0.027 but didn't pull the trigger when price was still hovering around that range.

• 

  nigelpink on 09/10/2016 - 01:37

  +1

  "We optimise your data before sending it across our private network, so you have an added layer of encryption and privacy"

  Hmmmmmm: http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20160624/pdf/43832xxhmwp49f.pdf

  • 

    Suspect420 on 09/10/2016 - 12:43

    http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2015/10/everything-youve-been-told…

    Suggest you have a read.

    Data Retention laws in Australia DON'T know the activity of the user. Rather they log the service provided by the ISP.

    • 

      nigelpink on 10/10/2016 - 03:56

      +1

      Thanks for the article. I've read it (although I'm already quite familiar with the law) and, frankly, that author has a pretty naive interpretation of the legislation. Or rather, he has a pretty naive interpretation of his own incorrect paraphrasing of parts of the legislation. For instance:

      Article: "For internet providers, the “destination of a communication” (which can be argued to mean “the websites you visit” or “people to whom you send messages”) is strictly not required to be monitored or retained."

      The law (s187A): "(not required to retain information that) states an address to which a communication was sent on the internet, from a telecommunications device, using an internet access service provided by the service provider and; (was obtained by the service provider only as a result of providing the service)"

      There's a subtle (but important) difference between 'destination of a communication' and 'address to which a communication was sent'. The article admits that ISPs are probably required to keep mail headers for their email service (e.g. @iinet.net.au). Why wouldn't this be excluded under the sub-paragraph quoted above? Although the author of the article does not give any detail other than say "it's unclear but likely", it's most probably due to the fact that the above only excludes outgoing (i.e. 'sent') emails. So they have to keep the part of incoming emails that constitute the 'the contents or substance of a communication' [see 187(4)(a)]. In other words, they have to keep incoming mail headers.

      So I send an email to my buddy saying "hey, could you email me the video from last night's circle-jerk?". The header here is not retained. He then hits 'replay' and sends me what I asked for. The header on this email is retained.

      Why wouldn't this exact same logic apply to other forms of internet communications? When you visit a website, your browser sends a HTTP GET request to the IP of the server the website is hosted on. Then you receive a HTTP response from the server. Based on the logic behind email header retention, your ISP is obligated to record both the HTTP header (if not encrypted), which has the exact url you requested in it, and any lower-level protocol packet headers, which include the IP addresses or sender/receiver and a timestamp.

      So in the worst-case (unencrypted HTTP), they know precisely which pages you are viewing etc. In the best-case, they at least have both IP addresses and the timestamp, which they can correlate against other connection data your ISP is required to retain (which is discussed in the article you sent). All of this data becomes even more invasive if your country happens to be a member of the '5 eyes' intelligence agencies, because they can then pull data from the NSA. As an aside, this legislation is basically ASIOs "price of admission" to that little data-sharing sewing circle.

      And just to head off any responses along the lines of me being a conspiracy nut, have a read of this article: https://theintercept.com/2016/08/14/nsa-gcsb-prism-surveilla… . It's a great case-study in how much damage non-malicious incompetence can do to someone's life when subject to this sort of drag-net surveillance. I'd hate to think what you could do to someone if you actually had bad intent… But the people working in domestic intelligence agencies never have bad intent, right?

      Just to underscore what I mean by data correlation, using the (hilariously un-ironic) analogy given in your article: "Data retention is like the TAC/VicRoads knowing what your license plate is, and how long you’ve had that license plate, but not where or when you drive each day." Yes, knowing a licence plate does not mean you know where and when someone drives each day. But, if you also have access to every toll-both and highway camera, then it actually does become a means of determining exactly that information by cross-reference. And if you have an American pal who operates a network of CCTV cameras watching every inch of every road…

      In short: That article takes a remarkable shallow and optimistic view on 'proactive' (read: warrant-less and all-encompassing) state surveillance. But I'm not really surprised given it's a Gawker Media publication…

      • 

        Suspect420 on 10/10/2016 - 14:21

        +1

        Wow.

        You have made some amazing points there. I understand exactly where you are coming from.
        I have not yet read the article you linked but will.
        End of the day though there is not much we can do about it. Or not that I know of anyway

      • 

        nigelpink on 11/10/2016 - 05:17

        +2

        @BKZ: Hey, thanks for the kind words. I sort of agree with you in one sense: I don't think there are really any technical measures an individual can take to protect themselves from 'targeted' surveillance in our current context. If these guys really want to know what you're doing on the net, you won't be able to stop them. However, on the 'non-targeted' side, if enough people use log-less VPNs/TOR, you may be able to 'blend in with the crowd'.

        In some ways it's a little ironic: the existence of pervasive state surveillance has created a mass-market for 'privacy products' like Wangle and other VPNs. A mass-market can only work if the technical barrier to consumption is low, something that I think the VPN market has achieved. So now, something that used to be very difficult to set up properly and that few people were using (meaning you stuck out like a sore thumb to anyone watching) is now very easy to use and is used by lots of people. Were I a 'terrorist/communist/lizard person' I would be jumping for joy. Now all I have to do to avoid detection is pay $5 a month while I use the internet to plot my 'bombing/proletariat uprising/human skin harvesting'. So drag-net surveillance has actually made us less safe, while simultaneously reducing our individual privacy.

        Even the FBI unintentionally admits this: you may have seen the FBI director in the media whining about how Apple and Android are now encrypting phones by default. The only reason they're doing this is because Apple and Android's customers derive value from this (i.e. they value privacy, which now requires protection due to mass surveillance).

        The other irony, at least in the US: Do you remember for a few years how there was this notion that 'the terrorists hate us for our freedom'? Well, I think we've managed to deal with that issue pretty convincingly :)

        Whether we can 'do something' in a non-technical sense, I'm a little on the fence. I hope we still have a true democracy that a theoretically informed public could use to express their disagreement with blanket surveillance. But I'm not sure this is the case in practice. For starters, the public seems pretty uninformed and apathetic on this issue. Doubly so for older generations, which is entirely rational: they have less to lose because (a) they're going to die sooner and (b) they live much less of their life on the internet compared to someone in my generation (i.e. Gen Y).

        I also don't think democracy can exist without individual privacy. Let's imagine I run for the House of Reps with a policy of 'reducing national security expenditure by one third, to repair the budget'. I could easily see how someone in one of these natsec agencies, who isn't even evil (just misguided), thinking: "This guy doesn't get it. We need those billions of dollars to keep the country safe from the lizard people (and myself employed). This guy's a threat to national security! We should make sure he doesn't get elected."

        And before you know it, my dick pics are anonymously leaked all over the internet. Now I'm out of the race (even though everyone is secretly impressed). I'm hoping we're not at this point yet, but a democracy where our choices are controlled by an un-elected and invisible power is a democracy in name only.

• 

  dothehustle on 23/10/2016 - 12:11

  Has Wangle been released yet?

• 

  Rhysoid on 02/11/2016 - 21:38

  +2

  Wangle was released today. I am using it now and seems to be working well.