Currently, we already have some companies that offer us privacy-focused products, such as Proton, Tutanota, Mullvad, and others, but a short while ago I found one that I've never seen anyone talk about called Ice Privacy.
From what I've researched, they've been on this path since 2019 and currently have two services. The first is Ice Drive, a cloud drive that gives out 10GB for free (although I heard they reduced it to 3GB) and focuses on privacy, with features like end-to-end encryption and two-factor authentication. They store your files with zero-knowledge encryption, and they also offer lifetime plans.
The other product is Ice VPN. I admit I haven't researched this one as much, but from what I've seen, it's a VPN that promises to keep as little user data as possible (something like MullvadVPN), and the data they do obtain is stored with 256-bit encryption.
Their company is located in Gibraltar (a British Overseas Territory located in Europe), which has good privacy laws.
The point of this post is to ask you guys if you've ever heard of Ice Privacy?
I understand that when it comes to privacy, it's good to choose companies that have been on the market for a long time and have the trust of their customers, but for a company to grow, someone needs to take the first step and use their products.
I'm not saying we should just go out and use all their products and join the company's ecosystem, but rather that we should add it to our arsenal of defense weapons regarding privacy.
The only thing I didn't find interesting is the fact that they don't have Mastodon accounts or a community on Lemmy, and although they have subreddits for IceDrive and IceVPN, they aren't mentioned on the company's website (that is, if they are actually official).

Knowing this information, will you give them a chance? If you've ever used any of their products, what did you think?

Links for those who want to know more about the company:

Company page:
ice.gi/

IceDrive privacy policy:
icedrive.net/legal/privacy-pol…

IceVPN privacy policy:
icevpn.com/legal/privacy-polic…

My current phone is starting to annoy me after 7 years of usage (Xiaomi Note 8 Pro) and I'm thinking of finally getting a new one.
With that in mind, I'm considering setting up a De-Googled OS as well, but there are a few things that I cannot compromise on:

• Google Maps (I need the live traffic data when in a hurry, otherwise CoMaps is very nice)
• Banking Apps (I've checked them in the GrapheneOS list and they do seem to work)
• Instagram (it sucks I know, but I like not being a hermit)
• Company Portal & Teams (absolute garbage, but I need it for work)

If any one of these aren't guaranteed to work, then it's not an option for me right now.

If they do work, which De-Googled OS should I go for? GrapheneOS does seem like the most private one and maybe the most likely to remain worked on and supported for a long time, but it means that I'm going to have to buy a Pixel, probably a refurbished one.

Lastly, if I install another OS and regret it, is it possible to install the stock OS again?

Edit: Also, what happens after Google's "Unverified App" decision has passed, will this affect these alternative OS?

I wish to have a discussion about how physical surveillance affects you in your day-to-day life; apart from Flock and (Ring) doorbell cameras (which I believe are pretty established at this point). This in context with your country of residence, and whether in a rural or densely populated area (as ("smart") cities typically "progress" at a faster rate).

I live in a medium-sized village, in a low-density area of The Netherlands. I rarely travel long distances and visit cities, but despite that, I'm increasingly confronted with surveillance infrastructure. Maybe it's because I know too much about it, and I no longer have the option to be unaware of it, but it eats at me on a daily basis.

Most notable is surveillance surrounding highways, especially: the increased density of radar sensors (which, on their own, might not reveal much about individuals; but could reveal one's progression when paired to ALPR data, for instance), "focusflitsers" (a (mobile) array of thermal-imaging cameras: peering through a vehicle's windshield, supposedly patrolling phone-usage during driving, but also featuring an ALPR (which also captures the driver, besides the license plate of course), and may also be used to record speed-indications (to identify "verkeershufters": roughly translating to "traffic jerks")), dedicated (mobile or stationary) ALPR cameras (supposedly only for detecting warranted vehicles or "hits": unless published in the police's "cameraplan"), "trajectcontroles" (average speed monitoring: essentially two sets of ALPRs, calculating the average time between readings), and (now) digital speed cameras (typically at intersections: instead of adapting road design...). But I'm glad I trust my government to only store "hits" and those in violation... /s

Other than that, I've spotted ALPRs (alongside an increasing number of PTZ cameras) at gas stations and above infrastructure (like bridges), but also built within boom gates before parking areas or recycling centers (behind a little square of darkened glass: in the base of the gate); and in, and surrounding retail areas (especially supermarkets) the number of cameras have risen (including the cameras at the self-checkout lanes: staring customers straight in the face; supposedly to discourage theft, but considering the "pay by face" concept, I fear it's in preparation thereof). Buses, structurally driving through my street, also have (exterior) camera side-mirrors, and therefore frequently capture me. And finally the eyesore that is public-facing home-surveillance systems (despite legally not allowed to, but of course not actively being enforced: as the government would shoot itself in the foot if it did).

That was my little rant, please feel free to leave yours below in the comments; I'm somewhat desperate to hear it. I'm especially interested in stories from Denmark: as even my mom (despite of the "I've got nothing to hide" type) noticed "average speed monitoring" cameras all throughout the country, and "speed cameras" being at the entrance of villages (which I believe you aren't allowed to be notified about in navigation programs: which is also insane to me), when she was there on a holiday. Please be very critical of every camera you're confronted with, including those that appear to have been there for your entire life. It's safe to assume every camera (including old "analog" cameras: through encoders) feed back into modern, digital surveillance platforms: which allow the footage to be actively monitored by AI (often to potentially trigger an alert, which an operator could respond to), possibly retained for an extended period of time (especially when considered evidence, it may be stored long-term: on a centralized server and/or cloud storage), and is shared effortlessly over the internet (instead of requiring physical transfer).

I'm using HaGeZi's Ultimate DNS Blocklist with AdAway as a base and am now trying to add my own "tweaks", according to what connections my phone makes.

I set PCAPdroid to automatically start capturing after reboot. Before reboot, I kill-ed as many apps and processes as possible without crashing Android and then cleared system memory. I then rebooted and left the phone untouched for five minutes. The following is a heavily edited excerpt of the resulting pcap file. I removed the source IPs, ports, package sizes and protocols, so that the excerpt only contains the destination hosts and the "issuing" apps/packages.

**Google Play Services**
playatoms-pa.googleapis.com
digitalassetlinks.googleapis.com
www.googleapis.com
mtalk.google.com
android.googleapis.com

**Google Play Store**
play-fe.googleapis.com
play.googleapis.com

**IronFox**
firefox.settings.services.mozilla.com
firefox-settings-attachments.cdn.mozilla.net
content-signature-2.cdn.mozilla.net

**Android**
es11.samsung-sm-ds.com

Do you have any insights regarding these hosts? What they do, whether they are necessary for an Android system that still runs on the proprietary Google libraries and Google Play Services or whether they can be blocked? I am already blocking the Play Store with a firewall, so the hosts associated with it might not even be getting through. Unfortunately, my firewall doesn't come with granular enough control to allow blocking of individual hosts, which I guess I could do with AdAway instead and see what happens. Anyway, lend me your wisdom! :)

I'm a big proponent of self-hosting, right to repair, and rolling your own whatever when you can. That probably started as teenage rebellion that got baked in - I was lucky enough to read both Walden and The Hobbit during a week-long cyclone lockdown several decades ago - but I suspect there's a non-trivial overlap between that space and privacy-minded people in general.

My endgame is a self-sufficient intranet for myself and family: if the net goes down tomorrow, we'd barely notice.

I also use LLMs as a tool. True self-hosted equivalence to state-of-the-art models is still an expensive proposition, so like many, I use cloud-based tools like Claude or Codex for domain-specific heavy lifting - mostly coding. Not apologising for it; I think it's a reasonable trade-off while local hardware catches up.

That context is just to establish where I'm coming from when I say this caught my attention today:

support.claude.com/en/articles…

To be accurate about what it actually says: this isn't a blanket "show us your passport to use Claude." Not yet.

The policy as written is narrower than it might first appear.

My concern isn't what it says - it's that the precedent now exists. OAI will do doubt follow suite.

Scope creep is a documented pattern with this kind of thing, and "we only use it for X" describes current intent, not a structural constraint.

Given the nature of this community, figured it was worth flagging.