I like the idea but product seems to be unfinished or at least still not usable considering the problem it is solving
Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
31–40 of 44 posts
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you -- and if you're the Sean who wrote Pion, this is built on your work, so that means a lot. :) The friends case is exactly the gap I kept running into. A mesh VPN is fine for my own devices and hopeless the moment someone else needs in, because now they're installing a client and making an account to look at one thing. Here they get a link. Baking it into self-hosting flows is the right instinct and I'd love…
I'm so ready for this and jellyfin, just need you to fix the cli args so i can run the server on Cloudflare TURN.
This is a really useful feature and on the top of my todo list
https://github.com/richlegrand/bitbang-cli/issues/9
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#33It's a single Go binary, shaped like ssh. The main difference is the transport -- WebRTC instead of TCP -- so it doesn't need the machine to be reachable in the first place. Run "bitbang serve" and it prints a URL. Open it in a browser and you get a terminal, a file browser, and a proxy to web apps on that machine's network -- or connect from another terminal. There's nothing to install on the connecting side, no acc…
I'm thrown off because you use so many em dashes, but the text surrounding them generally seems human. Not judging or brigading, just personally don't want to add a new tool to my toolbelt knowing it's made with ai right now. Is bitbang made with ai?
Yes, I started using AI for coding (Claude Code) after much consternation -- it's been really good at boosting my productivity. This is a passion project I tackle in my spare time, I like coding, but I don't like much of the coding. Much of it is drudgery-- AI is great for that. But there is no substitute for code review.
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#34IPv6.
(Let's skip the discussion, I don't feel like watching groundhog day today.)
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#35Fantastic work on this. This idea has so much promise, I hope this is the project that makes it take off. Self-hosting is pretty these days with docker. Exposing it to the internet is the annoying part. I do Jellyfin via netbird, but that means I don't really share it with my friends. I hope something like this getting baked into self-hosting flows is killer. My other pet peeve is that people use 'Cloud Services' for…
[dead]
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#36IPv6. (Let's skip the discussion, I don't feel like watching groundhog day today.)
You actually bring up a good point. v6 genuinely helps here. It gives every device a routable address, so no nat, but it doesn't open a hole through the firewall, which still defaults to blocking inbound, and it doesn't address authentication. You'd still need something to introduce the peers and verify identity. What v6 changes is that hole punching gets easier and more connections go direct. v6 does kill CGNAT specifically, which is the worst case for hole punching. I would really like to see CGNAT go away, which would happen in a 100% ipv6 world. Weirdly, v6 still isn't close to 100%... v6 good for BitBang and doesn't replace, which I assume was the point you were making.
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#37how's this different from iroh?
Pls see reply above.
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#38IPv6. (Let's skip the discussion, I don't feel like watching groundhog day today.)
You actually bring up a good point. v6 genuinely helps here. It gives every device a routable address, so no nat, but it doesn't open a hole through the firewall, which still defaults to blocking inbound, and it doesn't address authentication. You'd still need something to introduce the peers and verify identity. What v6 changes is that hole punching gets easier and more connections go direct. v6 does kill CGNAT spec…
UPnP is the standard way to get CPE firewalls to allow a port.
Other than that, discussing IPv6 on HN is… draining at best. It's all been argued a million times at this point. People hate it. People love it. People love to hate it. People hate to love it. I'm done :-)
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#39Will shamelessly promote my thing: https://ssh-j.com No applications except regular ssh client. Needs an SSH connection on the client as well though.
Hey there, neat offering.
I see you posted it before. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26500128
If you want this to have more traction engage with those of us who have/had questions. Please consider an example section once connected to ssh-j.com
Thanks.
Re: Show HN: BitBang – Reach machines behind NAT from a browser, no account
#40This seems simple and utile! Reading though the white paper on GitHub, there is a malformed Markdown table in the “Why WebRTC?” section [1] that probably just needs one more | somewhere.
[1] https://github.com/richlegrand/bitbang/blob/main/whitepaper....