Problem:
Whitelisting has been implemented across virtually all regions of the Russian Federation. In many cities, there is essentially NO internet access anymore — whitelists operate 24/7, and only a couple of services remain accessible. Based on ticket responses and this discussion (https://hub.xeovo.com/posts/100-russia-introduces-whitelists/comments/88), I understand you prefer not to own infrastructure in Russia.
Why this location is needed:
Without an entry node inside Russia, users in whitelist-affected regions lose all VPN access. Whitelists are unlikely to be enforced on servers (as this would break critical services like Linux updates, nginx, redis, etc.), making internal servers a viable solution.
Proposed solution:
Partnership model without infrastructure ownership:
- A third party rents and manages servers in Russia
- You configure your software only on these servers.
- You maintain zero ownership and no financial ties to Russian providers
- Users regain internet access even under whitelists
Use cases:
- Bypass whitelist restrictions for Russian users
- Maintain service continuity as whitelists expand
- Preserve access to uncensored internet for affected users
This approach allows you to serve Russian users without compromising your principles or taking on legal risks associated with owning Russian infrastructure.
Would you be open to discussing this partnership model?
8 Comments
I'm all for this, but in a slightly different form. We need an entry point in a "friendly country" to have a dual VPN. For example, Armenia-Finland, etc.
Another option is to open an entry server with a hosting provider, from which some Russian companies rent servers.
The problem is that only some subnets of VK cloud and Yandex cloud providers are available in the whitelists. The complete whitelist depends on the provider. Also, no one has the complete addresses of the whitelists.
In that case, what's the point of setting up an entry point in Russia? Unless the Xeovo server is hosted in the same place as Yandex and others. And even that's no guarantee.
Besides, they'll attract more attention, like AmneziaVPN, which hasn't worked at all lately.
If there are whitelists and really strict restrictions, then it will be every man for himself. That is, the solution will always be individual and will only work in a specific place for specific people.
The only legal option left is to leave the country. It's true that other countries are moving in roughly the same direction, meaning they're introducing more and more restrictions.
"Other countries are moving in roughly the same direction, meaning they're introducing more and more restrictions"
This is the real problem. There will be no country to hide in, if each of those enable strict restrictions policy.
Pretty much, yeah.
A company i own tried to apply to get our coordination servers whitelisted and got rejected. My business ultimately had to abandon certain regions due to huge losses in sales.
I agree. A public VPN brand would ultimately land someone in jail if someone were to cooperate with hosting in Russia.
Good points and ideas. However, our stance on this matter has not changed.
A more reliable, long-term and safe option is to sneak one of our IPs/domains into a whitelist. This is, of course, almost impossible at this stage, but we are working on it.
The situation is almost identical to Turkmenistan, but on a smaller/controlled scale at the moment. If they flip the switch and enable it globally, there will be little we can do.
Today I ran some tests and found something that will make you happy. Can I put it in the tickets?
Sure, thing! Our team will check it out tomorrow.