{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreieb5je7evi7dswm6pfnveequlrvbppcrvasxovt7rvymck6oijkpq",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:haakkg7y3xdghcdmprxeexso/app.bsky.feed.post/3mlvmhahn6tu2"
  },
  "path": "/t/mullvad-exit-ips-as-a-fingerprinting-vector/37910#post_6",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-15T14:32:06.000Z",
  "site": "https://discuss.privacyguides.net",
  "tags": [
    "will improve",
    "example"
  ],
  "textContent": "Huh? How is this a problem?\n\nThere is no information to be gained here except some relational information between exit servers.\n\nI can _maybe_ see this being a _potential_ problem for you if you:\n\n  1. Use the same online identifier switching between multiple Mullvad servers (which you probably should not do), **and**\n  2. Also use switching VPN servers as a way to compartmentalize different identities (which you should not do)\n\n\n\nEven still, practically speaking this is not going to create a unique deanonymizing fingerprint because people are still sharing IP addresses.\n\nThis is not going to impact anyone except people who vastly overestimate how much anonymity a VPN provides you with. Why are you switching servers so excessively in a 30 day period anyways?\n\nIt’s commendable that Mullvad will improve this behavior anyways, but this is not a serious concern.\n\nEveryone I’ve seen making a big deal about this on social media platforms feels like a fed to me tbh, for example,",
  "title": "Mullvad exit IPs as a fingerprinting vector"
}