logoalt Hacker News

imcritictoday at 11:55 AM5 repliesview on HN

I wish they would improve wireguard-the-protocol as well: wireguard doesn't stand a chance against gov/isp blocks.


Replies

razighter777today at 12:00 PM

That's more of a job for an encapsulating protocol. (shadowsocks or similar) Wireguard isn't designed to be obfuscating alone. It's just a simple l3 udp tunnel with a minimal attack surface.

show 2 replies
tvshtrtoday at 12:23 PM

There are forks of wg because of this. Like amnezia-wg

show 2 replies
holysolestoday at 2:59 PM

The mullvad apps do offer obfuscation options (shadowsocks, etc) but i agree it would be nice if something was baked into wireguard itself. I recently went through setting up shadowsocks over wg for my homelab and it was a good bit of effort

tetris11today at 12:24 PM

Anywhere I can read more about this?

DANmodetoday at 1:00 PM

Known Limitations

WireGuard is a protocol that, like all protocols, makes necessary trade-offs. This page summarizes known limitations due to these trade-offs.

Deep Packet Inspection

WireGuard does not focus on obfuscation. Obfuscation, rather, should happen at a layer above WireGuard, with WireGuard focused on providing solid crypto with a simple implementation. It is quite possible to plug in various forms of obfuscation, however.

tl;dr Read the docs.

show 1 reply