3 ms·
I'm a little off-put by the creator's attitude towards clients he didn't have a hand in making[0]. And the fact that 5 months ago he said we'd have a windows cl
by vxNsr 8y ago
I'm a little off-put by the creator's attitude towards clients he didn't have a hand in making[0]. And the fact that 5 months ago he said we'd have a windows client around the corner, and yet after taking a cursory look at the two projects, development on one appears to be stalled, and the other still can't support windows, doesn't bode well.
I'm insanely impressed that he's come up with something so good, and I have no knowledge of cryptography and writing truly secure code, so I don't like to complain like this... but it would be nice to have a real timeline so that we can make our own decision about whether we want to use the closed source alternatives.
[0]https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16515637 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16515637
- akivabamberger 8y agoYour comment is very misleading. Reading what you linked to, creator has the (extremely legitimate) concern of users relying on closed source implementations of WireGuard. Which is not at all the same as "clients he didn't have a hand in making"
- vxNsr 8y agoI read that based on his ignoring tunsafe's author's comments, and the fact that he apparently unilaterally blanned the author from the wireguard subreddit. I don't know either person at all, I only found out about tunsafe and the "controversy" a few hours ago after seeing this post and googling for the windows alternatives that "are not recommended" but are mentioned on the wireguard site. I admit I did editorialize a bit more than I should have.