Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> WireGuard uses UDP and a small handshake footprint, making detection and blocking via DPI harder.

Not quite true. Wireguard is already actively detected and suppressed if necessary. There's already a fork that employs basic changes to improve the protocol in this regard. AmneziaWG was shown to be more robust to detection for now.

https://docs.amnezia.org/documentation/amnezia-wg/

Too bad managing WG is such a pain and Tailscale/Netbird don't support this protocol yet. The following two issues need attention:

https://github.com/tailscale/tailscale/issues/10696

https://github.com/netbirdio/netbird/issues/1096



At Obscura we just tunnel WireGuard over QUIC's unreliable datagram mechanism to make it look like HTTP/3 (for DPI): https://github.com/Sovereign-Engineering/obscuravpn-client/b...

We just upstreamed our patch to quinn-rs that pads Datagrams to MTU: https://github.com/quinn-rs/quinn/pull/2274


Some DPIs just flat out block HTTP/3 already.


> Some DPIs just flat out block HTTP/3 already.

Actually, some DPIs just straight-up reject UDP (and since DNS and NTP are UDP-based*, just straight-up interception-and-redirect).

* TCP DNS exists but practically not used for most "normal" tasks, and at this point the censor is trying to block anything anyways.


> Too bad managing [Wireguard] is such a pain[.]

It is? My clients on OpenBSD need about ten lines in /etc/hostname.wg[0-9]+ and that includes the routes!


If hub-and-spoke does it for you, it's manageable.


True. but based on my researches don't use DPI on the NIN, so you might be able to use WG or OpenVpn on a VPS inside Iran but not to a VPS on let's say digital ocean. They can also selectively increase the or decrease the strength of their DPI as well, for example a range of IP can be graylisted and nothing will work on it, or they put more active probing effort on some ranges of IPs.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: