[Neoshadow42]

Right, but the banking website was one example of an system that might force IPinside installation.

Losing access to several necessary systems basically makes it mandatory.

Even if you could buy a burner device to access those systems, the average person will not - and that's the problem here.

[palant]

Disclaimer: I’m the author of this article.

Quite a few people living in South Korea say exactly that: they keep an old laptop around only for online banking. And they try to avoid whatever else requires IPinside and similar applications.

This solves the issue at least partially on the individual level. But most people will in fact not do this.

[vgb2k18]

In the article I cannot see Android and iOS mentioned. I also can't discern if banks alone, or banks and other vital services require IPInside. This logic is going somewhere so hear me out please! (and this is meant to be a humble query, I hope it comes across that way).

To me this ambiguity leaves the door open for challenges to the label "mandatory spyware" as a blanket label. With the ambiguity open, a plausible scenario is this: Only banks enforce IPInside, and Koreans can access full banking services from their mobile Android and iOS devices (with IPInside installed), meaning their laptops and PC's wouldn't need IPInside installed. Meaning: the label mandatory would be an overstatement. I'm not against the label mandatory, if... These gaps in knowledge are filled in with more info (forgive me if I it was clearly stated in the article for all to see! I read it the best I could but on mobile so who knows what I missed).