VPNs Are a Symptom, Not a Feature: Why the Internet Is Broken

We have all been there. You start up your work computer, and the first thing you do, almost without thinking, is connect to a VPN. Or perhaps you want to watch a show that is not available in your country, so you open up a VPN app to appear as if you are somewhere else. Maybe you are worried about your ISP tracking your browsing, so you use a VPN to hide your traffic.

In case you are not entirely sure what a VPN is, it stands for Virtual Private Network. It is a tool that routes your internet connection through a server located elsewhere (e.g. your workplace or a different country). Because of this routing, a VPN can mask your actual location, making it seem as if you are browsing from somewhere else. At the same time, because VPNs may be located inside an office network, they can also provide access to internal resources that are not available to the public internet.

VPNs are everywhere these days, even integrated into operating systems and browsers. They play such a crucial role, not because they are technologically necessary, but because the internet we have built has fundamental issues. And that should worry us. VPNs are not just useful tools; they are a series of surgical bandages over systemic failures caused primarily by greed, whether through crime or the pursuit of increased revenue. Here are three simple truths VPNs reveal about the internet.

1) VPNs for internal access: patching distrust with VPNs

The most common use of VPNs is to manage distrust. Many VPNs exist solely to let employees access internal systems from the public internet. This would be unnecessary if the internet were inherently trusted. Historically, internet services were exposed to the public internet, with login credentials and firewalls intended to keep malicious actors out. That model failed spectacularly, leading to the rise of VPNs. Today, the dominant security model is “zero trust”: never trust the network, always verify identity.

Let me paint you a picture to show just how crazy this really is. Doors, whether to your house or office, are designed to keep unwanted people out. You lock them, and only those with keys can enter. VPNs are like having to crawl through the sewers to get into your own house because you cannot trust the street outside. We have collectively decided that doors are not secure enough, and instead of fixing the doors, we make everyone go through the sewers.

2) VPNs for privacy: hiding because surveillance is normalised

A second major reason people use VPNs is to protect themselves against pervasive tracking and surveillance. Services like ProtonVPN exist because various actors including ISPs, mobile carriers, dominant platforms, and surveillance states can observe or correlate our traffic.

If personalised surveillance were not embedded in the economics and technical design of the internet, people would not need to tunnel their traffic through third parties to avoid being watched. A healthy internet would provide privacy by default, with ubiquitous end-to-end encryption, minimal metadata exposure, and legal systems that do not encourage data collection. Instead, we have incentives that monetise visibility. The VPN becomes a personal shadow, purchased and trusted because nothing else respects your anonymity.

Here is another metaphor for you. Imagine this: every time you are out in public, whether you are walking down the street or sitting in a café, there is someone following you. This person watches your every move, jots down notes, and reports back to companies and governments. To dodge this, you would have to buy a hoodie, put on some sunglasses, and maybe even resort to a fake mustache just to keep your identity private. Welcome to our world, where VPNs are just another part of the disguise we need to maintain any semblance of privacy.

3) VPNs for bypassing geo-gatekeeping: overcoming intentional scarcity

The third reason people use VPNs is to bypass artificial regional restrictions, such as streaming services locked to specific regions, app stores that hide apps by country, or content geo-restricted due to distribution contracts and licensing models that favour scarcity and segmented pricing. VPNs allow users to appear as if they are somewhere else and reclaim access.

This is a political and economic problem, not a technical one. The internet should be a global medium, but commercial and legal models fragment it into national enclaves. VPNs are the tool citizens use to push back. This workaround exposes a broken equilibrium: instead of enabling open global access, the platform and media industry restrict, fragment, and rent access. Users resort to tunnelling to recover a basic expectation: that something available on the internet should be available to anyone on the internet.

And here is another metaphor for you. Imagine heading to the cinema to watch the latest blockbuster movie, only to be told you cannot watch it because of your nationality. To get around this, you would have to get a fake passport to prove you are from somewhere else. And here is the fun detail: you have already bought the ticket and they happily accepted the money. Even if you have paid for a streaming service, you are still blocked from accessing a majority of their content because of where you are located. Even if you manage to get around the restrictions, they harass you with limiting subtitles to only the local language. This limitation also hits local foreigners, who may not speak the local language (yet) but are still blocked from accessing content in their native tongue.

The fact that websites like PlayPilot and JustWatch now exist just to help people understand regional restrictions shows how normalised this problem has become. Instead of fixing geo-restrictions, we have built an entire ecosystem around finding and bypassing these man-made barriers.

Discussion: Why do we accept this?

Now, we might not be able to wipe out internet crime, but that does not mean we should just roll over and accept surveillance and geo-blocking as the norm. These issues highlight deeper problems within our digital infrastructure and governance.

Surveillance has become so commonplace that we have started to see it as just another part of our digital lives. But why on earth do we put up with this? We have got laws against stalking and invasion of privacy in the real world, so why do we tolerate mass surveillance online? This normalisation of surveillance is often brushed off as necessary for security or the convenience of personalised services. But make no mistake, this comes at the cost of our privacy and autonomy. We have got to ask ourselves: do the benefits of all this surveillance really outweigh the cost to our fundamental rights? I have yet to meet anyone who genuinely likes "the algorithm" and that it controls what they see online.

Similarly, geo-blocking fragments the internet and limits our access to information and entertainment based on where we live. This is not just an inconvenience; it builds inequalities in access to digital content. Why do we put up with a system that restricts what we can see and do online based on where we live?

Instead of pushing for a world with open access, we are heading in the opposite direction. Take Denmark’s recent attempt to make VPNs for bypassing geo-restrictions illegal, for example.

This raises some serious questions about the future of the internet and the role we play in shaping it. Do we want an internet that is fragmented and controlled, or one that is open and accessible to everyone? These are not just technical issues; they are fundamental questions about the kind of society we want to live in.