NETWORKMANAGER SUPPORTS WIREGUARD!

Based VPN protocol. OpenVPN and IPSecfags absolutely BTFO
>story
phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NetworkManager-1.16-RC1
>WireGuard info and download
wireguard.com
wireguard.com/install/
Also general WireGuard thread

Attached: 0FE1987A-26FF-4C0D-9262-CA9CDAC71ABC.jpg (800x525, 25K)

Other urls found in this thread:

azirevpn.com/wireguard
restoreprivacy.com/wireguard/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>tfw still no 1.0 release

kita
when will it support windblows though

Attached: sengoku clap slow.gif (400x400, 142K)

Someone said they’re working on replacing a certain Windows VPN driver. Apparently once that’s done, they can make the Windows version

Also, they recently released the Mac version.

>winjeetOS
who gives a shit?

>Still no official windows client
Is there a non botnet vpn provider like mullvad that uses an unofficial windows client for wireguard out there?

>>winjeetOS
>who gives a shit?

Attached: 1474890449573.jpg (320x334, 21K)

Why doesn't it support adding preexisting configuration or using domain names instead of IP addresses

is this one of these freetards programs that will be in beta forever and never get any real adoption?

>windows

Attached: lain laughing.gif (700x704, 295K)

based

I use Ubuntu 18

Linuxman himself endorsed WireGuard, so I think it's gotten a lot of adoption already.

AzireVPN advertises WireGuard, but IDK if they have it baked into their client yet or not

It already has been adopted in many VPN services, and a lot of them are testing them. Wireguard is many times better than OpenVPN

azirevpn.com/wireguard
Everything but windows, this is pissing me off.

Friendly reminder that WireGuard is still too young to reliably use

restoreprivacy.com/wireguard/

Attached: wireguard.png (2436x1785, 393K)

unless you're Goldman Sachs or Google trying to impose WireVPN to access your trillion-tier networks, it's secure enough, it's actually more secure than usual OpenVPN which uses TLS

It has not been audited yet. You don't know if everything is secure yet. Even the devs say that. There could still be bugs that need to be worked out.

anything can be buggy theoretically, even most TLS implementations which run the internet show critical and ridiculous bugs from time to time, WireVPN is very small and based on technically proven encrypted communication

And WireGuard hasn't proven to be more secure than the current options that have been audited.
WireGuard does look cool. But it's still early.

It's on their GitHub in development.
Tunsafe open sourced too after the big outcry but i couldn't get it to build.

>WireGuard works by adding a network interface (or multiple), like eth0 or wlan0, called wg0 (or wg1, wg2, wg3, etc). This network interface can then be configured normally using ifconfig(8) or ip-address(8), with routes for it added and removed using route(8) or ip-route(8), and so on with all the ordinary networking utilities. The specific WireGuard aspects of the interface are configured using the wg(8) tool. This interface acts as a tunnel interface.
How can a mere program's design so based?

be so based*