[HillRat]

You can't be prosecuted under S.686 for accessing TikTok, with or without a VPN; the Act deals specifically with financial and contractual relations between foreign entities and US entities. So, sure, you could face up to twenty years if you, say, take knowing and affirmative steps to evade a specific Treasury declaration regarding your business (say, by concealing the fact that the People's Liberation Army has been funding your cybersecurity company, or that you're buying suspiciously-inexpensive 5G radios for your telecom company from Iran), but that's the sort of thing you'd expect to face jail time for regardless.

I'm skeptical about the RESTRICT Act -- treating TikTok as a one-off case rather than putting meaningful federal restrictions around the use of personal data tells you where Congress' mind is here -- but the OP's fearmongering is just ridiculous.

[ashwagary]

>by concealing the fact that the People's Liberation Army has been funding your cybersecurity company, or that you're buying suspiciously-inexpensive 5G radios for your telecom company from Iran)

What if a VPN service like Mullvad is partially or fully purchased by an "adversary" and added to a banned list unbeknownst to you, could continuing to buy VPN services using crypto or cash get you up to 20 years in jail by your reading?

[silisili]

I came to the same conclusion. I feel like people are just scrolling to the punishment section without actually having read anything above it.