Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Warp – Mobile VPN

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 500 posts

Re: Warp – Mobile VPN

#421

Post by stdcli »

eastdakota wrote: post #292
ignoramous wrote: post #252

There goes me and my co-founder's plan of disrupting the Mobile VPN market. Or may be, we still have a chance? Anywho, congratulations Cloudflare! I long held an opinion that the VPN market was ripe for disruption when I looked at privacy policy of some of the top players. Having analysed the market, I find that its defragmented with no clear run-away winner. I hope you're able to make a headway with all the interest…

Email me: matthewatcloudflaredotcom. Perhaps you and your cofounder can help build your vision within Cloudflare? I'd love to chat.

First, thank you for the first implementation when the app was just 1.1.1.1 Ive been using it for a while.

Not sure if you can answer this question, but are the performance benefits still there in conjunction with utilizing the VPN google uses to encrypt traffic with google fi? This announcement mentions they have 2x the latency in comparison to WARP, but did not mention specifically which google VPN technology (not sure if they have multiple) but I assume something mobile related since this is a mobile application.

If I use the WARP app in conjunction with google fi, am I layering this VPN on top of the 2x latency of google fi, thus slowing down WARP VPN to gain then the other performance benefits of optimized network switching of google fi?

Neither project is open source (that I know of) so it is hard to understand how the implementations overlap or not with one another. I also am not an expert in VPNs so maybe this is not a good question, but I find myself reading Cloudflare's blogs alot and couldn't help but ask.

Re: Warp – Mobile VPN

#422

Post by F147H34D »

fc_barnes wrote: post #335

One thing about using VPNs on the phone is that a lot of mobile/public networks only allow port 80, which prevents the VPN from connecting. If CF makes a version of wireguard that can do port 80, that would be great. As far as their bottom line, I guess this helps them sell services by having a documented number of people suckling the internet straight from the CF teat?

wg uses UDP. Can be configured to run on any port. If connection is restricted to TCP only, then use udptunnel.

Re: Warp – Mobile VPN

#423

Post by magicbuzz »

I stepped thru getting some Ubuntu systems using 1.1.1.1 for DNS but retaining DHCP otherwise. Looks like this is tricky to do but some new features came in with a netplan package update that allows this to be done easily in 19.04:

https://askubuntu.com/questions/1001241/can-netplan-configur...

Re: Warp – Mobile VPN

#424

Post by mr_toad »

broknbottle wrote: post #309
jedberg wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's only near you when you're at home though. This works around the world.

wouldn't be that difficult to write a script that checks geoip and launches a VPS in the region closest to your current devices public address. You could even create an iOS shortcut to allow you to do it from your iPhone

Not sure how hard it would be to install WireGuard fully unattended, I tried it with OpenVPN months ago and still haven’t completed it.

Once you get your script to work, you’d have to wait minutes for the VPN to spin up in a new region.

Re: Warp – Mobile VPN

#425

Post by mr_toad »

tw04 wrote: post #123
jgrahamc wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with this statement. We haven't pushed incompatible standards or any other nonsense. We've literally pushed out the latest standards and enabled more encryption (see Universal SSL making SSL free years before Let's Encrypt; see enabling IPv6; enabling HTTP/2; etc. etc.). As for HTTP/3... so will we. See: https://blog.cloudflare.com/http-3-from-root-to-tip/ , https://blog.cloudflare.com/the-road-to-quic/ an…

You've built a product (warp) based on Wireguard and refused to work with the upstream project - so saying that you're pushing standards is far more nuanced than you make it seem - at best. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19500725

From what I can see (correct me if I’m wrong) this is an implementation of the WireGuard protocol in Rust.

WireGuard is written as Kernel Module in C, with a GPL licence; BoringTun is a user space program written in Rust with an MIT licence.

So it’s not really even a fork.

Re: Warp – Mobile VPN

#426

Post by terrywang »

Almost thought this was an April fools joke (the app icon also makes it like more. While it's good to have option for non-technical people who needs to protect their network traffic and privacy, I'd stick to my own DIY WireGuard (now that we've got working client for iOS, Android and macOS, etc., also performs exceptionally well over IPsec - performance, simplicity), strongSwan based IPsec VPN as backup whenever network traffic encryption over untrusted network is required.

NOTE: I doubt this won't survive longer than 3 days in China mainland (inside GFW).

Re: Warp – Mobile VPN

#427

Post by eastdakota »

stdcli wrote: post #421
eastdakota wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Email me: matthewatcloudflaredotcom. Perhaps you and your cofounder can help build your vision within Cloudflare? I'd love to chat.

First, thank you for the first implementation when the app was just 1.1.1.1 Ive been using it for a while. Not sure if you can answer this question, but are the performance benefits still there in conjunction with utilizing the VPN google uses to encrypt traffic with google fi? This announcement mentions they have 2x the latency in comparison to WARP, but did not mention specifically which google VPN technology (not…

I’m not sure, and I think you’re kind of off-topic for this particular sub-thread, but we’ll have a ton of performance data across a matrix of device, software, and network operators. And, when we do, we’ll definitely publish it.

Re: Warp – Mobile VPN

#430

Post by auslander »

Another free service, now with a CF app on your device.

  Service      Scope                    User Data
  DNS          1.1.1.1 users            Browsing history
  CDN/Proxy    CF protected websites    SSL decrypted user forms, passwords, emails
  Warp VPN     Warp users               Device data, browsing history, apps traffic
Most sensitive is raw, SSL decrypted web traffic, and users using two or more services at the same time. CF promise they don't use data, but legalese have loopholes, like do they store/use aggregated (not raw) data?
Post reply on HN