Live data from Hacker News

Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

github.com

51–60 of 67 posts

Re: Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

#51
Neat! This is a great replacement for my SSH tunnels when I need a different IP.

Somewhat related tool: pproxy, can, among many other things, "convert" different tunnel protocols into each other. Also features routing capabilities. I used it to turn an SSH SOCKS5 into an HTTP proxy. https://github.com/moreati/pproxy

Re: Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

#52
This hybrid approach addresses a significant user pain point - the ease of routing specific traffic through VPN tunnels. However, while Wireproxy's utility in personal and small-scale deployments is evident, its scalability and security in larger, enterprise-level applications warrant further scrutiny. The reliance on user-space operation, though advantageous for certain aspects of performance and compatibility, introduces potential bottlenecks and security concerns

Re: Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

#53
post #50
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TIL multi-account containers allow per-container proxy settings! Am I correct in thinking it needs a separate extension to set that up, like this one? https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/container-pro... Edit: I was not correct, which is apparently grounds for downvotes now.

You can be downvoted for anything. Walk it off :)

You've misread my intention. I just think the downvotes are funny, and I know such edits attract more :P

Re: Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

#54
post #52

This hybrid approach addresses a significant user pain point - the ease of routing specific traffic through VPN tunnels. However, while Wireproxy's utility in personal and small-scale deployments is evident, its scalability and security in larger, enterprise-level applications warrant further scrutiny. The reliance on user-space operation, though advantageous for certain aspects of performance and compatibility, intr…

GPT comment

Re: Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

#56
post #52

This hybrid approach addresses a significant user pain point - the ease of routing specific traffic through VPN tunnels. However, while Wireproxy's utility in personal and small-scale deployments is evident, its scalability and security in larger, enterprise-level applications warrant further scrutiny. The reliance on user-space operation, though advantageous for certain aspects of performance and compatibility, intr…

There really are two completely different uses for VPNs.

One is a connection allowing you access to a private network for whatever purposes, which is what this feature enables.

The other is routing ALL your networking through it to disguise where you're located.

Confusing and confounding the two leads to disaster.

Re: Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

#57
post #33

https://github.com/dariost/soks works better for what I needed to do with wireguard. It does more or less the same thing but it reuses an existing wireguard interface. I detailed my use in this blog post https://www.nicoco.fr/blog/2023/09/10/wireguard/ (yes, shameless plug).

WTF is _this_

Re: Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

#58
post #51

Neat! This is a great replacement for my SSH tunnels when I need a different IP. Somewhat related tool: pproxy, can, among many other things, "convert" different tunnel protocols into each other. Also features routing capabilities. I used it to turn an SSH SOCKS5 into an HTTP proxy. https://github.com/moreati/pproxy

[deleted]

Re: Wireproxy: WireGuard client that exposes itself as a HTTP/SOCKS5 proxy

#60
post #46
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TIL multi-account containers allow per-container proxy settings! Am I correct in thinking it needs a separate extension to set that up, like this one? https://addons.mozilla.org/en-GB/firefox/addon/container-pro... Edit: I was not correct, which is apparently grounds for downvotes now.

No separate extension needed; it’s right there in the container settings now! Somebody has the detailed steps in a sibling comment.

Do you mean Firefox has created a version that routes container traffic through proxies without the use of the the Container proxy addon?
Post reply on HN