And that is why I don't torrent, living in Germany. Even just leeching will put you on the radar of, at best scam law firms, at worst motivated rights-holders.
qbt only ever sees the VPN as its network. It is logically isolated from my main gateway.
there are healthchecks running, so if the VPN fails qbt enters in a restart loop until the VPN is back to a healthy status.
I use private trackers for 99% of my torrents.
You also have to know that these scummy law firms use honey pot attacks, where they advertise themselves as leechers and record your IP if you upload to them. Technically a proxy to another country would just be enough here, but hey, this works too and I sleep better.
Since you use a torrent container and a vpn container I am interested in how you manage to communicate with the torrent container.
Do you utilize the *arr stack? Also with a docker?
If the answer is yes, how did you achieve the communication between the containers?
Reason I am asking is, that I want to connect to my other container but when I bind my container to the service I am unable to let it communicate directly with it.
By that logic, I'd need to access the container through the vpn container, right? (*arr <-> vpn container <-> downloader container)
After much thinking I managed it myself and found that out as well. What I also needed was the environment variable FIREWALL_OUTBOUND_SUBNETS so my other containers could connect to the container.
A company admitting they comply with the law when ordered to by the court is a positive to me as it means that they don't do it unless they don't do it on a whim and they are complying with the law, which would most likely also include privacy laws. Any company that would refuse a court order is going to be shut down and probably have all of their records turned over instead of the narrow subset that would be ordered by a court.
What you want is for them to demonstrate incapacity to comply. “We’d love to help your honor, but as we sell a privacy service we don’t log user activity”
"From day one of our operations, we have never provided any customer data to law enforcement, nor have we ever received a binding court order to log user data. We never, for a second, logged user VPN traffic, and the results of multiple audits prove that we are true to our policies," the company said.
In the event the company does receive information requests from a law enforcement agency, NordVPN says it "would do everything to legally challenge them."
"However, if a court order were issued according to laws and regulations, if it were legally binding under the jurisdiction that we operate in, and if the court were to reject our appeal, then there would be no other option but to comply. The same applies to all existing VPN companies if they operate legally. In fact, the same applies to all companies in the world," NordVPN said.
So they don't log and are just admitting that they might need to if they were forced to. That is extremely reasonable.
You do you but it also means that if they suspect you of illegal downloads or streams and get that court order, that they'll log that shit and then you'll receive those lovely letters eventually, making the whole point of the VPN pointless.