AntiMalwareAugust 18, 2026🇷🇺Translated from Russian

VPN Encryption Alone Cannot Hide Traffic from Network Detection Systems

A Habr contributor writing under the username mr_tom explained why encrypted VPN connections can still be identified and blocked by network filters. Although the contents of the tunnel remain hidden from observers, the connection itself continues to produce observable characteristics that allow classification.

Filtering systems can examine the destination IP address, port number, transport protocol, initial handshake features, packet sizes, inter-packet timing, and the temporal behavior of the data flow. These elements enable the system to recognize traffic patterns without decrypting the payload. Simple DPI solutions require no deep analysis and can simply restrict access to known server addresses, subnets, ports, or transport types.

More sophisticated platforms construct traffic fingerprints by combining multiple indicators. They may also perform active probing, connecting directly to a suspected server to observe its responses. Both client traffic patterns and server reactions to unsolicited queries therefore influence detectability.

The author specifically analyzed the combination of VLESS, XHTTP, and REALITY. These components function at different layers: VLESS defines client-server interaction logic, XHTTP manages transport, and REALITY provides transport protection along with a TLS profile. Using port 443 does not automatically make VPN traffic indistinguishable from ordinary HTTPS, because classifiers evaluate handshake details and subsequent flow characteristics beyond the port number alone.

The central takeaway is that no universally unblockable VPN exists as an engineering category. Even heavily disguised connections remain vulnerable to blocking by IP address, newly developed signatures, or the results of active probing. Encryption strength and resistance to traffic recognition therefore represent two distinct properties.

Related articles

HabrPrivacy & Surveillance

Browser Extension Anonymizes Sensitive Data Before Sending to AI Chatbots

A new browser extension automatically detects and replaces sensitive information such as names, INN numbers, bank cards, and emails with pseudonyms before any text or files reach AI chat services. The tool operates entirely locally in the browser, ensuring original data never leaves the user's device while allowing AI models to process anonymized placeholders. Responses from the AI are decrypted back to readable form only on the user's screen using an in-memory mapping that disappears when the browser closes. The solution supports over 70 file formats including DOCX, XLSX, and PDF, plus offline OCR for scanned documents to handle the most common leakage vectors used by HR, legal, and accounting teams. Multiple validation layers including checksums, Luhn algorithm, entropy checks, and normalization for Russian name declensions reduce false positives that plagued earlier regex-based attempts. The extension is available in a free version on the Chrome Web Store covering 33 data categories, with advanced file and scan features offered on request.

SecuritylabPrivacy & Surveillance

Browser Privacy Ranking 2026: Tor Browser Leads at 9.5 While Chrome and Yandex Rank Lowest

SecurityLab.ru has published a detailed 2026 browser privacy ranking that evaluates major browsers across six criteria including initial network behavior, site isolation, fingerprint resistance, funding model, configurability, and code auditability. Tor Browser scores highest at 9.5 for its comprehensive protections including unified fingerprinting and layered JavaScript controls, followed by Mullvad Browser at 9.0 and LibreWolf at 8.5. Brave earns 7.5 for built-in tracker blocking but faces criticism over default telemetry and cryptocurrency features. Firefox scores 6.0 out of the box yet reaches 8.5 after extensive configuration, while Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Opera, and Yandex Browser occupy the bottom positions due to persistent tracking mechanisms and closed-source components. The report also highlights the Local Mess localhost tracking technique used by Meta and Yandex that bypassed browser isolation entirely.

HabrPrivacy & Surveillance

Russian Ministry Certificates Enable Potential State MITM on Foreign Domains

Russian companies facing sanctions have started adopting root certificates issued by the Ministry of Digital Development and Communications to maintain HTTPS access after commercial CAs revoked or refused to renew their certificates. Installing these Ministry certificates allows browsers to trust sites using Russian national CAs but also creates a pathway for man-in-the-middle interception by state-controlled entities. The article details a concrete threat model where a government-linked operator could use the Ministry root to generate on-the-fly certificates for any domain, including foreign services outside Russian jurisdiction. To mitigate this, the author demonstrates how to re-sign the Ministry root with OpenSSL nameConstraints limited to .ru, .su, and .рф domains only. Tests on macOS with Homebrew show that the constrained certificate still validates Russian banking sites such as online.sberbank.ru while correctly rejecting attempts to validate foreign domains like sberbank.com. The technique requires users to maintain their own cross-signed root and never rely on pre-installed Ministry or Yandex Browser roots for full protection.

HabrPrivacy & Surveillance

Bypassing Blocks, Privacy, and Anonymity Remain Separate Challenges for Decentralized Networks

The developers of the decentralized circumvention tool Tunnel Cat have clarified that their service addresses only traffic delivery and does not guarantee privacy or anonymity. Transport-layer TLS encryption protects data in transit between nodes but provides no end-to-end protection for conversation content. The team explicitly recommends using separate E2E-encrypted messengers such as Signal or Matrix rather than relying on Telegram. Operational telemetry is retained to comply with legal obligations in multiple jurisdictions and to monitor blocking patterns inside Russia. Because client devices relay traffic for others, the architecture inherently prevents strong anonymity guarantees comparable to Tor. The project deliberately separates the circumvention function from messaging and anonymity tools to avoid overpromising security properties.