Hacker News Reader

Comment by zx2c4 | Hacker News Reader

Actually there are a couple open source alternatives around the corner -- one in Rust and another in Go -- fully supported. I agree that software really does thrive with an abundance of alternatives. An important thing is that we can verify the security of these implementations.

View on HN

zx2c4: I've looked at the Go version on your homepage, but the initial text in the git project. "This is not a complete implementation of WireGuard ..... There is no group of users that should use the code in this repository here under any circumstances at the moment, not even beta testers or dare devils.", is this the one that you refer to or do you have a closed git project with a newer version?

Either way. The L2TP/IPSec implementation in Windows 7 I use now is also closed-source proprietary software. So I can't see that TunSafe should be worse since the author is public. I guess TunSafe will not be able to communicate with the wireguard servers if it does not use the correct encryption and protocol scheme?

> TunSafe will not be able to communicate with the wireguard servers if it does not use the correct encryption and protocol scheme

There's a lot more to writing secure software than merely implementing something that appears to speak the protocol some of the time, or merely implementing a protocol at all. As I said, don't rely on TunSafe.

As above, we'll have snapshots of the cross platform implementations shortly. Until then, I'd recommend just waiting patiently.

zx2c4: I've been waiting for quite a while, how far away in time is shortly?

"appears to speak the protocol some of the time, or merely implementing a protocol at all"

ludde: Is the wireguard protocol fully implemented or just partially implemented in the version that is on the homepage?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com