4 ms·

After skimming the website and the FAQ[1] it seems to be a safer tinc[2]. It's a very cool piece of software and I always wanted to set something like that up b

After skimming the website and the FAQ[1] it seems to be a safer tinc[2]. It's a very cool piece of software and I always wanted to set something like that up between my servers and routers but never found a need convincing enough to go through the trouble. [1] http://www.freelan.org/page/faq http://www.freelan.org/page/faq [2] http://www.tinc-vpn.org/ http://www.tinc-vpn.org/

makefu 13y ago
The points why freelan is better regarding security are no real issues, but tradeoffs in terms of performance which just copy-pasted from the tinc-vpn security faq[1]. I have been using tinc for quite a long time and it feels pretty stable, but the configuration of new nodes is quite a PITA. For that reason a lot of bootstrapping scripts have been built around this [2]. Also, i love the possibility to easily dump the whole (known) network graph and create great graphs from this info [3]. I am using it mostly for reaching hosts behind NAT and creating a secure environment for these hosts.I never have tried the 'connect whole network' feature. [1] http://www.tinc-vpn.org/security/ http://www.tinc-vpn.org/security/ [2] https://github.com/krebscode/painload/blob/master/retiolum/scripts/tinc_setup/new_install.sh https://github.com/krebscode/painload/blob/master/retiolum/s... [3] http://euer.krebsco.de/graphs/retiolum/retiolum_1.svg http://euer.krebsco.de/graphs/retiolum/retiolum_1.svg
- bincat 13y ago
  Tinc's problematic protocol (security wise) killed it for me before. For example, it didn't have pfs. It seems that with 1.1pre3 or 4 they have gotten a new, experimental protocol. Hopefully it is an improvement.