What would be the advantages/disadvantages of a VPN architecture that allowed you to choose your entry point and exit point. With most VPNs you choose your exit location and connect to that node directly as an entry point as well. The proposed method would allow you to choose an entry point close to you and then route traffic internally to the closest exit point to your destination. Trust would be required in the provider that they aren’t logging or reporting your traffic at some point along the way, but that’s required with traditional VPN connections anyway. I feel like it may confer some bandwidth advantages since the VPN provider could optomize the path between source and destination, but would that come at the cost of additional latency? I also think this architecture would be vulnerable to the legal restrictions at both ends, instead of just the chosen destination. Is this currently implemented by any VPN providers, and if not, what are all the ways I’m not thinking of that this is a terrible idea?
Mullvads multi hop is often automatically used when a person wants their anti dpi (daita) feature but has chosen a server without that functionality.
Multihop is a useful tool when trying to access geofenced content, often my own.
The problem is that there are more ways for it to fail. Jurisdictions aren’t a huge deal if the provider has a well tested system. Bear in mind that almost everywhere in the world kyc data can be ordered to be given up by a judge. A provider with less knowledge of who you are is safer in any jurisdiction than one with a whiz bang system who has your pii. Use cash.