41–50 of 260 posts
Mac OS route selection always takes into account the source address of the IP packet in addition to the routes in the routing table.
If a socket binds to a particular address, the Mac OS kernel will choose routes associated with the interface that address is on and ignore the others.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WireGuard is already available on both platforms - or do you mean kernel space WireGuard without an additional app? Fwiw the existing app integrates seamlessly into the apple ecosystem.
I think the OP means so that it can be used without an app and so it can be used with Apple's "Always On VPN" setup. Right now I believe "Always On VPN" only works with the OS supported VPNs: IKEv2, L2TP, SSL VPN, and Cisco IPSEC https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/vpn-overview-depa...
Consumer VPNs typically aren't.
Airplane Mode used to be a true “all wireless disabled” mode, but Apple have relaxed it a bit over time, possibly because it's so frequently used and there are so many services provided by WiFi and Bluetooth now that aren't related to the Internet (e.g. connecting to AirPods or an Apple Watch). They also relaxed what turning off WiFi and Bluetooth in the Control Center (separately from Airplane Mode) do, so that thin…
The rules on aircraft changed, so the feature was updated.
Airplane Mode used to be a true “all wireless disabled” mode, but Apple have relaxed it a bit over time, possibly because it's so frequently used and there are so many services provided by WiFi and Bluetooth now that aren't related to the Internet (e.g. connecting to AirPods or an Apple Watch). They also relaxed what turning off WiFi and Bluetooth in the Control Center (separately from Airplane Mode) do, so that thin…
Yup.
This should trend to the top of HN. Apple bills themselves as a privacy-centric company. I hope they clean this up asap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I hope Wireguard makes it into iOS/macOS at some point. Still early days relative to other protocols of course but it's so much simpler and more reliable (even beyond the security benefits). I use it extensively on both platforms for access to my own networks and services nowadays.
Quoted post unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WireGuard is already available on both platforms - or do you mean kernel space WireGuard without an additional app? Fwiw the existing app integrates seamlessly into the apple ecosystem.
I think the OP means so that it can be used without an app and so it can be used with Apple's "Always On VPN" setup. Right now I believe "Always On VPN" only works with the OS supported VPNs: IKEv2, L2TP, SSL VPN, and Cisco IPSEC https://support.apple.com/guide/deployment/vpn-overview-depa...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
VPNs were always meant to carry internal traffic to a private network, not the public internet (hence the name Virtual Private Network). The fact that a VPN server can send you a route for 0.0.0.0/0 always was and always will be a happy accident.
[flagged]
I wouldn't entirely agree with that (although out of context I do agree).
It's a Virtual Private Network connection, you create a Virtual (not physical) Private Network (between your device and another device/server) there's no real difference between a site-to-site VPN and a client-access VPN other than if the devices at each end route more than just the partner traffic over the private network.
If I connect a "site-to-site VPN" between my computer and your computer, if I add a route to send all traffic for a particular network to your computer as the next hop, that makes it "client-access" for that particular network, if I add a default route it then sends any internet request I make to your device as the next hop.
If your device decides to forward the packets (and probably NAT them) then I now have some privacy for my internet traffic.
VPNs were originally designed to replace dial-up modem connections since the internet was becoming more ubiquitous and it would be far cheaper for someone to connect to their local ISP then use a VPN to connect to their remote network (either personally or usually between sites), than dial directly to their other site (also it was usually far cheaper for one internet connection than a bank of modems and ISDN lines (if you wanted 56.6Kbps or 64Kbps connections)
Would be nice if someone who actually knows what he’s doing looked into this. This guy might be on to something or he might be creating a whole lot of drama about nothing.