111–120 of 176 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tailscale, or any encrypted mesh overlay is perfect for this. Infact I prefer it that way. Rustdesk can do what it does best at its core.
I disagree, modern software should make encrypted connections over something like HTTP3 or QUIC directly so true secure end to end connectivity works. This would make VPN software such as tailscale obsolete.
RustDesk still does not support encrypted connections when self hosting: https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk/issues/3714
I think you bring up a fine point. Most applications have encryption built in and transparent to the user. While technical IT people in charge of infrastructure will not make this assumption, it is not unreasonable, at the same time, for small business / individual users, to not understand or know of this limitation. VNC does not, for example, and you need to set up port forwarding through ssh. X2Go does....but I don…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
VNC and RustDesk are both remote desktop solutions, however, Rustdesk is considerably more performant than the VNC family, because the latter primarily sends framebuffer updates, while the former can use modern video codecs and temporal compression to encode screen changes much more efficiently.
I just have one word for you: TightVNC. That's what made me uninstall RustDesk.
> TigerVNC was originally based on the (never-released) VNC 4 branch of TightVNC.
It seems to be popular, that’s why I’m asking.
RustDesk should fix their password requirements: https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk/discussions/2888
It's open-source, so just build it yourself with the tiny change. Something this trivial could be done with a 30 second prompt at this point, so there's not even an excuse of "too much effort". I will note that the XKCD password scheme being proposed there is, in fact, completely insecure. A modern consumer GPU can crack "four random English words" in a day. You can argue that it's the user's choice to be allowed to…
I proposed replacing the ridiculous checklist with zxcvbn.
I agree xkcd's scheme is a bad example and distracts from the real point, which is that a checklist is fundamentally bad, not that some specific password format should be allowed.
RustDesk still does not support encrypted connections when self hosting: https://github.com/rustdesk/rustdesk/issues/3714
Would be nice if they did support that, but on a LAN you can always encrypt at layer 3 with WireGuard.
"We don’t plan to implement this directly, as it is designed for test initially, we do not recommend using RustDesk with a public IP alone, that's also why direct ip access is turned off by default.
For security and privacy, we strongly advise using it in combination with a VPN—the VPN tunnel already provides end-to-end encryption, so additional encryption within RustDesk is unnecessary in that setup.
That said, we welcome community contributions! Many users express interest or share feedback—but very few take the next step and submit a pull request. If you’re able to help, your PR would be greatly appreciated! "
Earlier quoted context omitted.
so without tailscale or any other intermediary turn service how does my computer behind a NAT connect to another computer behind another NAT
Ideally using ipv6 without NAT, but yeah hole punching or quic address discovery like iroh does works too
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would be nice if they did support that, but on a LAN you can always encrypt at layer 3 with WireGuard.
their reply in that issue: "We don’t plan to implement this directly, as it is designed for test initially, we do not recommend using RustDesk with a public IP alone, that's also why direct ip access is turned off by default. For security and privacy, we strongly advise using it in combination with a VPN—the VPN tunnel already provides end-to-end encryption, so additional encryption within RustDesk is unnecessary in…
hate this. "we don't want this on principle... but we would accept it if you did it yourself!" just say you don't feel like it! don't act like it's a bad thing except for when somebody else does it for you, that's just dishonest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
their reply in that issue: "We don’t plan to implement this directly, as it is designed for test initially, we do not recommend using RustDesk with a public IP alone, that's also why direct ip access is turned off by default. For security and privacy, we strongly advise using it in combination with a VPN—the VPN tunnel already provides end-to-end encryption, so additional encryption within RustDesk is unnecessary in…
> That said, we welcome community contributions! Many users express interest or share feedback—but very few take the next step and submit a pull request. If you’re able to help, your PR would be greatly appreciated! hate this. "we don't want this on principle... but we would accept it if you did it yourself!" just say you don't feel like it! don't act like it's a bad thing except for when somebody else does it for yo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That said, we welcome community contributions! Many users express interest or share feedback—but very few take the next step and submit a pull request. If you’re able to help, your PR would be greatly appreciated! hate this. "we don't want this on principle... but we would accept it if you did it yourself!" just say you don't feel like it! don't act like it's a bad thing except for when somebody else does it for yo…
yeah it's definitely confusing messaging i can't imagine being a community contributor there and saying "ok im gonna help implement this thing that they just described as not a good fit for their thing". i think being under resourced or whatever or just not having anyone on the team that would be able to pull this off is a fine thing to be forward about, but it gets confusing because they kinda frame it like it's the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah it's definitely confusing messaging i can't imagine being a community contributor there and saying "ok im gonna help implement this thing that they just described as not a good fit for their thing". i think being under resourced or whatever or just not having anyone on the team that would be able to pull this off is a fine thing to be forward about, but it gets confusing because they kinda frame it like it's the…
I prefer when projects say "we don't have the resources for this but we agree it would be nice" because then I actually feel like it would be worth the PR. but this project makes me feel like they don't want the change which means I don't want to put in the work