/tech/ - Technology★

stay away from it

>>960935 (OP)

Maybe both Torvalds, the Senator, and the Arstechnica writer all value their privacy and have found WireGuard to be very good?

If something new came out and it was better than what was used previously, and more secure, don't you think people would be voicing their opinion in favor of it?

No no no, what am I saying? Of course it's a grand conspiracy to weaken VPNs and snoop on your 8ch posts.

>>960935 (OP)

What's the problem with Torvalds shilling it?

>>960935 (OP)

yeah it's totally gov ops that's why they started putting it inside LINUX and not in windows right? after all the whole population uses Linux, right OP?

If the senator you're talking about is Ron Wyden, he's one of the few people in congress who actually know something about privacy and technology and has a good track record opposing state surveillance, the Patriot Act, SOPA/PIPA, etc.

>>961003

>If the senator you're talking about is Ron Wyden

As soon as I saw the quote from a "US Senator" I knew two things:

1. It was Ron Wyden.

2. OP has no fucking idea who Ron Wyden is.

>>960935 (OP)

>I haven't gotten the time to look into the code very much yet,

Says it all, really.

>>960982

Linux has the highest server distribution.

>>961005

>Not knowing the very very few not-corrupt ameriburger politicians makes you stupid

>Having an actual life makes your opinion invalid

OP and you are both goddamned fucking retarded, but OP is a paranoid nutjob that freaks out because Torvalds just sent an email and he didn't see his face, and amerifags government is insanely corrupt and disrespectful of privacy, whereas you are a faggot with no reasoning ability whatsoever. I don't agree with him but god I'd put my money on him over your incompetent ass any day.

how will it affect the Linux ecosystem

have you looked at source code

only way to really find out how it works out

Torvalds apparently has

>>961019

>Not knowing the very very few not-corrupt ameriburger politicians makes you stupid

OP may or may not be stupid, but he's definitely ignorant. You, on the other hand, are a fucking idiot.

>Having an actual life makes your opinion invalid

like, man toke i don't have time for that politics stuff toke like i'm just livin my life man who cares what some suit thinks, man, like what toke has he done for decriminalization, man, like legalize it man 420 BLAZE IT

Kill yourself.

>>961025

I WAS REFERRING TO HIM INVALIDATING OPs OPINION BECAUSE HE DIDN'T THOROUGHLY VET THE CODE HIMSELF YET YOU STUPID ASS NIGGER

Wireguard:

>new meme cryptography

>in the kernel

>recommended by a literal communist cuck who happens to be one of my senators (fml)

>as recently as June its own developers cautioned that it's still very experimental (ie it's alpha quality)

I'll be passing on this one, at least until the OpenBSD guys write a compatible suite, which they won't bother doing if it's flawed or doesn't catch on.

Linus glows in the dark, BTW, and has since he sold Transmeta to the Deep State and they took it black.

>>961174

>new meme cryptography

No. Wireguard relies on thoroughly vetted cryptographic primitives. The protocol has been formally verified.

>in the kernel

So? So is IPsec in OpenBSD, and you're one of those faggots whose not happy unless his tonsils are resting on an OpenBSD dev's glans at all times.

>recommended by a literal communist cuck who happens to be one of my senators (fml)

Meaningless memeing. Hate Wyden all you want, but he's not even remotely a communist. As for him being a cuck, I have no idea about his personal life, but while I find cuckoldry distasteful, it has nothing to do with Wireguard.

>as recently as June its own developers cautioned that it's still very experimental (ie it's alpha quality)

It says quite clearly on the Wireguard homepage that the software is still a work in progress and that the code should not (yet) be relied on. This is a valid reason not to use Wireguard (yet), it's the reason I'm not using it (yet), and it's the only semi-intelligent thing in your entire post.

>I'll be passing on this one, at least until the OpenBSD guys write a compatible suite,

They're already working on it.

>which they won't bother doing if it's flawed or doesn't catch on.

OpenBSD is the project that unknowingly hired an FBI mole to write their IPsec stack. They're not gods, no matter how much they make you swoon, buddy.

Bump

>>960972

>Torvalds, the Senator, and the Arstechnica writer all value their privacy and have found WireGuard to be very good?

(((pure coincidence)))

>>961181

>the old point by point Reddit rebuttal-reply

They really need to get some fresh blood down there at Shill Central.

>>961200

And you pointing this out without any rebuttal is a sophic move?

>>961199

This. Bump.

>>961200

>disagreeing with multiple things = leddit

>>961200

Not an argument

>the code isn't perfect, but I've skimmed it

This from the guy who left a flawed random number generator in his kernel for over a decade.

>>961233

I don't think being a bad coder is bad, but the shier tenacity at which Linus defended it for "muh backwards compatibility" was amazing. It's almost as if having broken randomization was useful to someone...

Really gets those almonds activated, no?

>>961200

He argumented while you meme'd. This makes you the shill here.

It's made by a Gentoo dev who also made pass, nightmare material for Pottery.

>>961250

Linus glows in the dark, this much is nearly certain. As Redhat moves more of system d into the kernel we'll see similar shenanigans as vuln after vuln is discovered and not just as PID 0, but inside the kernel.

I've seen my future and it's OpenBSD and 9front.

>>961181

It's amazing how all it took was one email on their mailing list to sustain FUD for decades.

OpenBSD audited their stack after that email and found nothing.

https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=129296046123471&w=2

tl;dr, yes some dude probably wrote a backdoor but it's highly unlikely it got merged into the main OpenBSD branch.

I am happy to hear the OpenBSD guys are working on a wireguard suite, I have found their configs and utils to be much more sane than linux alternatives.

>>961612

>https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=129296046123471&w=2

nice damage control KEK

>>961199

Never heard of Arstechnica in my life. Is it (((compromised)))? who owns it?

>>960949

XDDDD

>>>/reddit/

>>960935 (OP)

>“In light of the serious cybersecurity issues with the two most widely-used VPN technologies,

Literally what problems were there with VPNs? I haven't been paying attention. Of course I wouldn't be surprised if stuff like OpenVPN is full of bugs. And since it's a US Senator, this is probably about business use for VPNs, not for using them as a proxy. So, stuff like VPN authentication.

torvalds is on our side

senate and aTechnica aren't

>>965461

Code Nast snapped it up. Yes, that counts as compromised in every sense of the word.

>CEO: Robert A. Sauerberg Jr

>Headquarters: One World Trade Center, New York City, United States

>>965561

*Conde Nast. They're a big media conglomerate and they actually bought and ran reddit for a while.

wireguard's implementation is only 4000 lines compared to the massive codebase of openvpn. The fewer lines the smaller the chance for bugs is.

>>961181

>No. Wireguard relies on thoroughly vetted cryptographic primitives. The protocol has been formally verified.

oh okay, off i go to install it then

>>965573

literally the most intelligent thing said in this thread so far.

It would be *so much easier* to hide a backdoor or just an accidental vuln in a codebase as huge as openvpn's than it would a 4k line kernel module

can you trust linus torvalds ?

I dunno, i'd say I was a fan but sometimes he'll say something like this: https://youtu.be/o8NPllzkFhE?t=16m43s which is a little hmmm.

Has any of you LARPers spent 5 seconds looking at the code, the bug trackers, or anything but "he said she said" gossip?