VPN vs Cloud Computers for connecting to home from Thailand

[WaveHunter]

I think that certain expats deal with the same problem I have:  Connecting with sensitive and highly protected servers from your home country while in Thailand.  I would like to talk with someone who really understand the intricacies of using VPNs or "cloud computers" to connect in a way that foregoes all of the extraordinary identity verification issues that now exist with connecting when you are on foreign IP addresses.

 

I know that for many, it's no big deal to connect to your bank occasionally, or log into your social media account, and I know that certain identity verification protocols are reasonable like using 2-part authentication, but I'm talking about when things go wrong and the target server detects you as a threat simply because you are connecting from a foreign IP!

 

The huge companies like Amazon Seller Central, or social media sites like Facebook and Instagram have become super sensitive to allowing connections from foreign IP's, and worse, they use robots to deal with this so if things go wrong, there is no live person you can turn to!  It can take days or weeks, or even never to get a resolution!  So, the obvious course of action to NOT try to connect using a foreign IP address.

 

Just for instance, I got locked out of my Facebook account, and to get it unlocked I had to go through 4 different identity verification steps, including taking a selfie of myself holding a piece of paper next to my face showing a 5 number code I had been sent by Facebook, and then I was still denied access, saying that adequate identity verification had not been provided and therefore my account was being permanently disabled and no further actions could be taken by me!  I lost that account entirely and there was no way to find a resolution since every email I sent was replied to by a robot!

 

AFter that I started using a VPN and it solved the problem for a while but now more and more of the US servers are actively looking to see if you are using a VPN and if you are, that now becomes a HUGE "red flag" also, resulting in all the identity verifications issues emerging again.

 

When you use a VPN, you are actually sharing that connection with lots of other people so it's very easy for the US-based servers to detect the unusual load and to recognize that you are most likely on a VPN.  Worse, many of the IP's that VPN's use become black-listed since therere are many people who use a VPN for unscrupulous reasons.

 

So, it seems that the solution is to get a dedicated static IP from the VPN provider (in my case, Nord) OR to set up a "cloud computer" as was suggested by someone who had a pretty compelling video on overcoming all of these extraordinary identity verification measure now in place in the US, by setting up your own "Cloud Computer" that you could designate as being in your own home country!

 

 

Nord says they can set up a static IP address that is mine and mine alone so perhaps that would solve the problem, BUT this video has a lot of compelling reasons why using a VPN is still a really bad idea.

 

So, I would love to get feedback from some of you that are much more tech savvy than I am about what would be the best way to go about this.

 

It's really become so bad that I'm starting to think the only solution is just move back to the States now...but if there is a way to solve this issue with a VPN or cloud computer I want to explore it, and any help at deciding VPN vs Cloud computer would sure help.

 

PS:  Please look at this video BEFORE commenting.  I'm really looking for a solution from people who have advanced knowledge of VPN's and Cloud based computing so I can know whether one of these two solutions will work for the issue I am describing.

[KannikaP]

8 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

More and more sensitive servers like for your bank and credit card companies, government sites, social media sites, and sales platforms like Amazon have become a nightmare to connect to from foreign based servers like here in Thailand.  Simply trying to connect with a foreign IP address triggers all sorts of extraordinary identity verification challenges that are becoming ridiculous!

I guess you are talking about USA, because I can access almost anything from here without my VPN connected, except of course UK television. 

[tgw]

There is a simple solution to your problem, if you have friends in the USA, just ask them to setup a VPN for you on their home router.

Use DynDNS if their IP address is dynamic.

 

[ozimoron]

A likewise simple solution is to get a cloud server for $5 a month, choose an Openvpn image or install it and create your own VPN.

[WaveHunter]

56 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

A likewise simple solution is to get a cloud server for $5 a month, choose an Openvpn image or install it and create your own VPN.

My understanding of cloud-based computer is you can set them on existing servers in any country you desire, so really it is very similar if not identical to a VPN in terms of masking your actual geographic location.

 

There are many other reason for using a cloud-based computer like increased computing power, speed and storage, none of which interest me.  My only purpose is to mask my geographic location.  It seems to me that in this regard a cloud computer and a VPN are virtually the same thing.

 

The issue is really all about the IP address that's generated from the host servers, and it seem to me that BOTH cloud computers and VPN could work for my purposes if the IP address is only used by one person...Me!

 

I also think it's important that it be a static address so that the receiving servers detects the exact same address each time I attempt to log in, so it "knows it me" each time.  Is that a valid concern, do you think?

 

My take on all of this is simply this:

 

1) In order for a target server like Amazon to suspect that I am connecting from outside of the US using a VPN, they can only suspect that based on the fact that the VPN's IP has much more bandwidth on it than one person could generate.  In other words it is shared by many different people.  That becomes a red-flag that someone is most likely using a VPN to connect from abroad.

 

2) Compounding this, if you are using a VPN's IP address that is shared with many other users, a lot of those users are probably using a VPN connection for unscrupulous reasons, increasing the likelihood that the IP address may become black-listed, so another red-flag.

 

However, If I use a VPN with a dedicated static IP address that only I have access to, on a server based in the USA, isn't it highly unlikely that the target server I am trying to connect to will have any reason to suspect I am using a VPN to connect from abroad?

 

I mean, it seems that it would be much simpler to just use the VPN and get a dedicated static IP, the it would be to set up a cloud-based computer...but the guy who made that video seems to disagree in a big way with using VPN...so that's what I'm trying to figure out.

 

DO you think a VPN WITH a dedicated static IP would be just as effective as a cloud based one, or not?

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

My understanding of cloud-based computer is you can set them on existing servers in any country you desire, so really it is very similar if not identical to a VPN in terms of masking your actual geographic location.

 

There are many other reason for using a cloud-based computer like increased computing power, speed and storage, none of which interest me.  My only purpose is to mask my geographic location.  It seems to me that in this regard a cloud computer and a VPN are virtually the same thing.

 

The issue is really all about the IP address that's generated from the host servers.

 

My take on all of this is simply this:

 

1) In order for a target server like Amazon to suspect that I am connecting from outside of the US using a VPN, they can only suspect that based on the fact that the VPN's IP has much more bandwidth on it than one person could generate.  In other words it is shared by many different people.  That becomes a red-flag that someone is most likely using a VPN to connect from abroad.

 

2) Compounding this, if you are using a VPN's IP address that is shared with many other users, a lot of those users are probably using a VPN connection for unscrupulous reasons, increasing the likelihood that the IP address may become black-listed, so another red-flag.

 

Now, If I use a VPN with a dedicated static IP address that only I have access to, on a server based in the USA, isn't it highly unlikely that the target server I am trying to connect to will have any reason to suspect I am using a VPN to connect from abroad?

 

I mean, it seems that it would be much simpler to just use the VPN and get a dedicated static IP, the it would be to set up a cloud-based computer...but the guy who made that video seems to disagree in a big way with using VPN...so that's what I'm trying to figure out.

 

DO you think a VPN WITH a dedicated static IP would be just as effective as a cloud based one, or not?

You don't really understand quite what a VPN does. The reason VPN's use servers in many countries is that the server gets an IP in a range allocated to the ISP they use for internet in that country. Merely having a cloud server (computer) does not allow you to access the internet from a browser on your own machine via that server. That's what a VPN does. It redirects internet requests to and from the web to your computer via the cloud computer. All VPN's sit on a computer in the target country. Some are locally hosted and some are cloud I would think.

[WaveHunter]

16 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

You don't really understand quite what a VPN does. The reason VPN's use servers in many countries is that the server gets an IP in a range allocated to the ISP they use for internet in that country. Merely having a cloud server (computer) does not allow you to access the internet from a browser on your own machine via that server. That's what a VPN does. It redirects internet requests to and from the web to your computer via the cloud computer. All VPN's sit on a computer in the target country. Some are locally hosted and some are cloud I would think.

I agree that I don't understand much of this at all ????. ALl I care about is masking my Thailand IP address. 

 

My understanding is that both VPN's and Cloud based computers are really land based servers that you connect to, and they act to relay your keyboard inputs to the servers you want to communicate with.  You can select a server that is located in any country that the host company has them in.  

 

If, for instance, I use a VPN server based in New York City (the one I usually connect to), then it means that the target server I want to connect to (Amazon.com, for instance) only sees the IP address of the VPN server in NYC, right?  The same is true if I were to connect through a cloud based server.

 

So basically, in terms of relaying my computer inputs from here in Thailand to Amazon in the USA, both VPN and cloud computers function exactly the same, right?

 

[gamb00ler]

23 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

1) In order for a target server like Amazon to suspect that I am connecting from outside of the US using a VPN, they can only suspect that based on the fact that the VPN's IP has much more bandwidth on it than one person could generate. 

I don't think this explanation accurately reflects what an Amazon server is able to determine about a connection that it accepts from a VPN provider.  The only data that such a server can see from such a connection is the IP address of the VPN provider's server, the IP address of the computer transmitting the packet on the last leg of it's journey and of course the actual user data in the packet.  I'm pretty sure the Amazon server would not be able to determine the "bandwidth" of the connection from the VPN server.  Perhaps you meant to use another term instead of bandwidth.

[ozimoron]

12 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

I agree that I don't understand much of this at all ????. ALl I care about is masking my Thailand IP address. 

 

My understanding that both VPN's and Cloud based computers are really land based servers that you connect to, and they act to relay your keyboard inputs to the servers you want to communicate with.  You can select a server that is located in any country that the host company has them in.  

 

If, for instance, I use a VPN server based in New York City (the one I usually connect to), then it means that the target server I want to connect to (Amazon.com, for instance) only sees the IP address of the VPN server in NYC, right?  The same is true if I were to connect through a cloud based server.

 

So basically, in terms of relaying my computer inputs from here in Thailand to Amazon in the USA, both VPN and cloud computers function exactly the same, right?

 

They don't relay your key presses. Your openvpn client (a program on your computer)  authenticates to the openvpn server and sends all (usually) of your internet traffic to that computer. The responses to your requests are sent back to your computer.

 

All internet requests go through a chain of computers. The vpn just adds another computer to the chain which acts like it's your local computer in Thailand. .

[WaveHunter]

1 minute ago, gamb00ler said:

I don't think this explanation accurately reflects what an Amazon server is able to determine about a connection that it accepts from a VPN provider.  The only data that such a server can see from such a connection is the IP address of the VPN provider's server, the IP address of the computer transmitting the packet on the last leg of it's journey and of course the actual user data in the packet.  I'm pretty sure the Amazon server would not be able to determine the "bandwidth" of the connection from the VPN server.  Perhaps you meant to use another term instead of bandwidth.

I agree that the Amazon server would only see the VPN's IP, and  would never see my own Thai IP...BUT, they can also determine more about the VPN's IP address which will indicate whether it is possibly a VPN server.

 

For instance, if I do a "what's your IP address" query of current IP address that my VPN connection is using, notice that the results show "VPN server" for services.

 

Clicking on "VPN Server" shows this:

 

So, I' not exactly sure what the criteria is for "suspected network sharing. device" is but the point is that it was somehow detected.

 

By contrast, if I disconnect my VPN and run the same test, it will show my Thai IP address, and notice for "services" is shows none detected:

 

 

[WaveHunter]

16 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

They don't relay your key presses. Your openvpn client (a program on your computer)  authenticates to the openvpn server and sends all (usually) of your internet traffic to that computer. The responses to your requests are sent back to your computer.

 

All internet requests go through a chain of computers. The vpn just adds another computer to the chain which acts like it's your local computer in Thailand. .

In the simplest possible terms, I speak to the VPN server, and then the VPN server speaks to Amazon on my behalf, and vice versa when the Amazon server responds. The VPN is in a sense a go-between.

 

Amazon does not know my IP address.  It only knows the IP address of the VPN server, right?  So, basically the VPN makes my IP address invisible.  That's all that really matters...but that is not even the crux of the problem I am talking about.

 

The Problem I am talking about is that the VPN's IP address can be examined by the Amazon server in a number of ways that can very easily determine whether that IP address is associated with a VPN or not and that is the problem.

[ozimoron]

Just now, WaveHunter said:

In the simplest possible terms, I speak to the VPN server, and then the VPN server speaks to Amazon on my behalf.  Amazon does not know my IP address only the IP address of the VPN server, right?  So, basically the VPN makes my IP address invisible.  That's all that really matters...but it is not even the crux of the problem I am talking about.

 

The Problem I am talking about is that the VPN's IP address can be examined by the Amazon server in a number of ways that can very easily determine whether or not it is from a VPN, and that is the problem.

That's the reason I figured you wanted a custom VPN server so it would be unknown to Amazon. I guess they kee a database of known VPN servers,

[WaveHunter]

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

That's the reason I figured you wanted a custom VPN server so it would be unknown to Amazon. I guess they kee a database of known VPN servers,

ALL VPN's provide anonymity.  No customization is required to do that.  That is why many people use them.  But, again, that is not at issue here.  The VPN does that just fine. 

 

The problem is that the VPN server's own IP address can be examined very easily to not only determine whether or not it is associated with a VPN server, but also if it might be a black-listed IP address, which many VPN IP addresses are since many people use VPN for unscrupulous reasons.

 

THESE are are the real issues that are causing me problems...the VPN's IP address

 

Amazon would not have to keep a database of VPN servers.  It is all right there for anyone to see.  When I go to What'sMyIP.com and enter the VPN server IP I am currently on it plainly shows that it is a VPN:

 

 

Again, my real question in this thread is whether or not getting a dedicated and static IP address for myself would solve this issue or not.

 

It's a very simple question that I used far too many words to ask, but that all I am trying to determine...so if anybody can help me to know this, I'd sure appreciate it ????

 

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

VPN's provide anonymity which is why many people use them.  But, again, that is not at issue here.  The VPN does that just fine.  The problem is that the VPN's server's own IP address can be examined very easily to not only determine whether or not it is associated with a VPN server, but also if it might be a black-listed IP address, which many VPN IP addresses are since many people use VPN for unscrupulous reasons.

 

Amazon would not have to keep a database of VPN servers.  It is all right there for anyone to see.  When I go to What'sMyIP.com and enter the VPN server IP I am currently on it plainly shows that it is a VPN:

So how do you think Amazon knows? They may even have a database of cloud ISP ranges and any request originating from a cloud server would be suspect. In the past they could have just blocked UDP but since the advent of TLS that's hidden.

 

One way to check might be to run a curl from a cloud server without using the VPN and see if it still thinks it's a VPN. They can't detect that the traffic is from openvpn afaik.

[gamb00ler]

29 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

I agree that the Amazon server would only see the VPN's IP, and  would never see my own Thai IP...BUT, they can also determine more about the VPN's IP address which will indicate whether it is possibly a VPN server.

Yes.... but you mentioned bandwidth as a criteria for identifying a VPN... that is not correct.  All Amazon needs is the IP address of the VPN server.  The Amazon server will then probably compare the IP address to list of known VPN server addresses.  IPv4 addresses are only 4 bytes (characters) long so a search will be very fast.

 

How are you communicating with the US based servers that you wish to spoof your location?

 

If only through a browser, then the US based server has fewer capabilities to determine your location accurately.  If you are using an application program provided by the US company, then they will have a greater ability to identify you and your location.  Their custom written application will have greater access to other information on your computer than they would have if only using a browser.

[fdsa]

I've answered a similar questions already, search for "fdsa" in this thread https://aseannow.com/topic/1277117-surf-shark-vpn/page/2/

 

 

in short: a "VPN" or "Cloud Computer" will not help if you would have a datacenter IP instead of home IP, if you would not properly setup your computer settings, and if sysadmins of a target website would have IQ above 80.

[WaveHunter]

15 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

So how do you think Amazon knows? They may even have a database of cloud ISP ranges and any request originating from a cloud server would be suspect. In the past they could have just blocked UDP but since the advent of TLS that's hidden.

 

One way to check might be to run a curl from a cloud server without using the VPN and see if it still thinks it's a VPN. They can't detect that the traffic is from openvpn afaik.

You're getting too technical for me LOL.  I don't know what openvpn, blocked UDP and TLS means.  All I know is that if whatsmyip.com easily determines that the IP address I am connecting with is a VPN, so can Amazon.

 

Again, my question s super simple:  If I get a dedicated static IP address from Nord that ONLY I have access to and no one else, would that not solve this issue?

 

If I am the only person associated with the IP address, and not hundreds or thousands of other VPN users, then how would that IP be suspicious in any way?

 

Is my reasoning correct or not?

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

You're getting too technical for me LOL.  I don't know what openvpn, blocked UDP and TLS means.  All I know is that if whatsmyip.com easily determines that the IP address I am connecting with is a VPN, so can Amazon.

 

Again, my question s super simple:  If I get a dedicated static IP address from Nord that ONLY I have access to and no one else, would that not solve this issue?

 

If I am the only person associated with the IP address, and not hundreds or thousands of other VPN users, then how would that IP be suspicious in any way?

 

Is my reasoning correct or not?

Hard to say definitively but probably not. A dedicated IP address is still contained in a range of IP addresses which would be known to Amazon. A dedicated IP address is likely of little use to you.

[WaveHunter]

11 minutes ago, gamb00ler said:

...---If you are using an application program provided by the US company, then they will have a greater ability to identify you and your location.  Their custom written application will have greater access to other information on your computer than they would have if only using a browser.

That's a good point you made, especially with Amazon since I interact wit them through theier apps via a Chrome browser. 

 

So basically I'm screwed LOL!  Even with my own dedicated IP address assigned by Nord VPN, they would still be able to query my geographic location through their apps on my computer?

 

But what if I disabled location queries from my system preferences on my Mac OSX?

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, WaveHunter said:

That's a good point you made, especially with Amazon since I interact wit them through theier apps via a Chrome browser. 

 

So basically I'm screwed LOL!  Even with my own dedicated IP address assigned by Nord VPN, they would still be able to query my geographic location through their apps on my computer?

 

But what if I disabled location queries from my system preferences on my Mac OSX?

What Amazon apps on your computer?

[WaveHunter]

19 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Hard to say definitively but probably not. A dedicated IP address is still contained in a range of IP addresses which would be known to Amazon. A dedicated IP address is likely of little use to you.

SInce you mentioned UDP which I have no clue of, maybe you can tell me if this has any relevance on whether Nord has a solution to my issue or not:

 

This is how Nord describes their dedicated IP address:

NordVPN's dedicated IP allows you to bypass CAPTCHAs, easily access corporate networks, and avoid blacklists for IP addresses tainted by unscrupulous use. You can use the dedicated IP feature on two devices at the same time: simply connect the first device with the Open VPN (TCP) protocol and the second one with the OpenVPN (UDP) protocol.

 

[WaveHunter]

15 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

What Amazon apps on your computer?

Actually nothing.  I meant that I log in through Chrome but then interact with the sites through Chrome and so I assume that once logged in they can access more things on my computer than I probably want to know! 

 

Most of the really difficult issues are actually with Facebook and Instagram since I can usually reach a human being at Amazon, but rarely if ever with social media sites

 

 

[eisfeld]

25 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Again, my question s super simple:  If I get a dedicated static IP address from Nord that ONLY I have access to and no one else, would that not solve this issue?

 

If I am the only person associated with the IP address, and not hundreds or thousands of other VPN users, then how would that IP be suspicious in any way?

 

Is my reasoning correct or not?

That depends on what IP range NordVPN would put you in, If that range is known as belonging to Nord or any VPN then you might still run into issues. There is no way to tell that without trying. And the range might get detected at any future point in time. It's the same cat and mouse these VPN providers are playing with services like Netflix etc. Now maybe they put the static IPs in a totally different range that wouldn't get detected. But who knows. Why risk it?

 

If you get some small cloud server for $5 bucks or so, install a VPN server like Wireguard on it and connect through that to your accounts then chances are very low that you'd run into issues because plenty of companies run all their employee traffic through company VPNs like that and you're not sharing a range that's used by only other VPN users.

 

Hetzner for example offers a small VPS for less than $5 and they have a preconfigured Wireguard setup so you don't have to do much to get it going. I wouldn't spend $22 a month on a Windows machine for no reason. I'm sure others like Digital Ocean and the other usual suspects offer something similar.

[WaveHunter]

Nord VPN strongly suggests they can deal with this effectively, and like I said at the beginning of this thread, the guy who made that YouTube video was discussing exactly the issues I am facing and said that cloud computing was effective.

 

So, I just fee thee MUST be a way to do this effectively and hope somebody can offer some positive suggestions here.

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

SInce you mentioned UDP which I have no clue of, maybe you can tell me if this has any relevance on whether Nord has a solution to my issue or not:

 

This is how Nord describes their dedicated IP address:

NordVPN's dedicated IP allows you to bypass CAPTCHAs, easily access corporate networks, and avoid blacklists for IP addresses tainted by unscrupulous use. You can use the dedicated IP feature on two devices at the same time: simply connect the first device with the Open VPN (TCP) protocol and the second one with the OpenVPN (UDP) protocol.

 

It's my view that their claim is misleading or outright false. The blacklists they refer to are usually MX (email) servers. Mail exchanges may blacklist a particular IP address while a website may blacklist a whole range. In the former case, you (anyone sending email) can't avoid being blacklisted if they abuse email sending rules. The dedicated IP address would be irrelevant. Sending bulk emails through a VPN would be a fraught exercise I think. They can't do it anyway because of SPF and DKIM rules which require the sender to have direct access to the sending server.

 

UDP is an alternative internet protocol to TCP which is used mainly for streaming where errors are tolerable and results in higher speeds. I won't go into a discussion of packet technologies lol. Suffice to say that either protocol is hidden by TLS encryption anyway so I believe that argument is BS anyway. 5 or 10 years ago they may have had a point there but not now.

[eisfeld]

2 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Nord VPN strongly suggests they can deal with this effectively, and like I said at the beginning of this thread, the guy who made that YouTube video was discussing exactly the issues I am facing and said that cloud computing was effective.

 

So, I just fee thee MUST be a way to do this effectively and hope somebody can offer some positive suggestions here.

Maybe they can. Maybe they can't. You can give it a try. If it works then it's the least hassle at around $10 per month all in.

 

For me a small VPS for less than $5 gives me more peace of mind and is cheaper.

 

So there you have it, two possible solutions.

[ozimoron]

9 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

Actually nothing.  I meant that I log in through Chrome but then interact with the sites through Chrome and so I assume that once logged in they can access more things on my computer than I probably want to know! 

 

Most of the really difficult issues are actually with Facebook and Instagram since I can usually reach a human being at Amazon, but rarely if ever with social media sites

They can only get your IP address, approximate location via the IP address, the user agent (chrome) and the type of machine you are using via the user agent. They may also leave a cookie which identifies your request and can match it with previous requests. No identifying data is sent or obtainable. If worried, use an anonymous window in chrome or firefox. .

[eisfeld]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

It's my view that their claim is misleading or outright false. The blacklists they refer to are usually MX (email) servers. Mail exchanges may blacklist a particular IP address while a website may blacklist a whole range. In the former case, you (anyone sending email) can't avoid being blacklisted if they abuse email sending rules. The dedicated IP address would be irrelevant. Sending bulk emails through a VPN would be a fraught exercise I think. They can't do it anyway because of SPF and DKIM rules which require the sender to have direct access to the sending server.

 

UDP is an alternative internet protocol to TCP which is used mainly for streaming where errors are tolerable and results in higher speeds. I won't go into a discussion of packet technologies lol. Suffice to say that either protocol is hidden by TLS encryption anyway so I believe that argument is BS anyway. 5 or 10 years ago they may have had a point there but not now.

They were just stating the TCP and UDP options as a solution to connect two devices at the same time to their VPN because that's how their setup works. Not sure why they need these crutches but doesn't really matter for the OP.

[fdsa]

31 minutes ago, WaveHunter said:

OK, let me put it another way. If you were in my shoes and wanted to solve this problem how would you go about it, short of getting no a plane and moving back to the States...which is what I'm getting close to doing?

I would ask someone who have bought a dedicated IP address from their home ISP to host a VPN server for me, then I would setup 2 virtual machines on my computer:

1) minimal Linux to connect to that VPN server and act as a "router" for another virtual machine

2) a "full" desktop OS for the desired tasks. This one would be connected ONLY to the first virtual machine, not to the host OS, and have to be tweaked accordingly for its job. For example, the DNS servers must be set to the target country of the VPN server, the time and date must match the target country, the system language must be set to the target country, the keyboard layout must NOT have Thai language and so on.

[WaveHunter]

5 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

That depends on what IP range NordVPN would put you in, If that range is known as belonging to Nord or any VPN then you might still run into issues. There is no way to tell that without trying. And the range might get detected at any future point in time. It's the same cat and mouse these VPN providers are playing with services like Netflix etc. Now maybe they put the static IPs in a totally different range that wouldn't get detected. But who knows. Why risk it?

 

If you get some small cloud server for $5 bucks or so, install a VPN server like Wireguard on it and connect through that to your accounts then chances are very low that you'd run into issues because plenty of companies run all their employee traffic through company VPNs like that and you're not sharing a range that's used by only other VPN users.

 

Hetzner for example offers a small VPS for less than $5 and they have a preconfigured Wireguard setup so you don't have to do much to get it going. I wouldn't spend $22 a month on a Windows machine for no reason. I'm sure others like Digital Ocean and the other usual suspects offer something similar.

Excellent and very positive response...thanks!

 

Forgive my ignorance of the technical underpinning of all of this but I'm a little confused.  If I set up a cloud server, why would there be a need to install a VPN?  I mean, in terms of masking my own IP here in Thailand, isn't that what a cloud server would effectively be doing?

 

I was in touch with such a company called called PaperSpace https://www.paperspace.com/ and they briefly described their cloud server set-up stating that I could select a geographic location for any server they have world-wide.  They also said that the ip address could be set up to be dedicated to my own cloud server.