Live data from Hacker News

Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

news.ycombinator.com

41–50 of 90 posts

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#41
post #14
post #13

I don’t really get the threat model of these “zero trust” appliances and how they are really different from a VPN. Can someone explain it to me? It still looks very much like a perimeter.

It's a "virtual" or "overlay" central reference monitor for the whole network --- imagine collapsing an entire campus network down to a single firewall --- which makes it really easy to draw arbitrary internal perimeters. The real customers for these products all tend to have group-based policies. If you remember NAC products from back in the day (policy-driven 802.1x and filtering, all designed to deal with the "che…

I would add, doing Zero Trust Networking properly means deny by default (VPNs are open by default), service based access (not whole host or network), microsegmentation (not whole network), and least privilege. You should also use posture checks to ensure the end device is compliant and personally I prefer 'authenticate before connect' with outbound only connections from source and destination.

Note, I am biased though as I work on an open source zero trust networking project - https://openziti.io/.

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#42
post #9
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that Twingate uses a service-based access model, rather than host/IP/ACL-based, as Wireguard defines the world. As you are based on WG, have you somehow paperer over that to move away from network trust and lack of scalability (that I read across HN/Reddit/YT) inherent to other WG based solutions?

I may not be fully understanding the question, but I think you may be referring to DNS-based resources? Those will allow you to manage access to an app or service by its DNS name (wildcards supported). You can also use IP or CIDR resources as well of course. In terms of scalability, are you referring to throughput or simply the complexity of policy management as the number of resources grows?

I refer to doing service based connections, abstracted away from whether its DNS, IP or something else. To do this you really need a private DNS function and to operate with attribute based access controls.

Complexity of policy mngt. I read that ACLs are fine at small scale but become a nightmare at larger enterprise scale.

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#43
post #17

One of the pain points I’ve experienced with configuration of traditional VPNs is when devices physically connect to different parts of the network when staff travel between home and different offices. For a small example, when working from home, we want to connect to SMB shares over the vpn, with regular traffic going over the regular LAN interface of the computer. When the same person comes into the main office, ju…

This is a fairly common scenario and one that we had in mind when building the NAT traversal implementation. The short answer is that you wouldn't need to sign out of Firezone when in the office -- the connection should hairpin off the nearest common router and go directly to the SMB share in this case.

This single handedly convinced me to try it out in my homelab!

Tailscale fails at this and I consider it fairly basic networking.

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#44

The concern I have with these types of solutions (meaning Tailscale, Firezone, etc.), is that I need to trust the provider not to mess up or maliciously exchange keys with rouge devices. Is this the case with Firezone as well? I see that tailscale addresses this now somewhat: https://tailscale.com/kb/1226/tailnet-lock

> maliciously exchange keys with rouge devices

Companies are slow to respond to the growing threat from adversarial make-up brushes.

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#45
post #39

Hey! I worked on WARP at Cloudflare. I believe Cisco has anyconnect and then there's zscaler. I'm curious how you guys are competing with the other folks in the space. WARP was/is a really tough product to maintain (crossplatform networking is very difficult). CF was doing well with WARP mostly due to the distribution advantage. I imagine it's harder for startups to break into the space.

Through OpenZiti into the mix too - https://openziti.io/ . Its open source and was designed from the ground up with zero trust, SDN, and deny-by-default principles. It also includes SDKs to allow developers to embed ZTN as part of the SDLC. We also built zrok ( https://zrok.io/ ) on top of it, as a demonstration of a 'ziti-native' app, and being a better Ngrok.

OpenZiti looks so enticing but it is certainly a completely different world.

Are there many big installations of it? With the vast majority of stuff being written for regular networks I do wonder if the amount of proxies/sidecars becomes unreasonable. Probably not though

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#46
post #10

I'm a big fan of Tailscale but it's unfortunate that it's proprietary, so it's really nice to see an open source alternative. The commercial pricing also looks very reasonable. Wishing your product much success.

This comment sounds like a promo for Tailscale. It's actually a suggestion to Firezone to model after what Tailscale are getting right. We need competition in this space, but tooling non-SV businesses can leverage. Tailscale is pulling this off well.

Tailscale is building a remarkable moat at extraordinary pace: capabilities real commercial use needs, on pricing that doesn't penalize the security-minded startup.

One key difference with their platform is the recognition so often missed inside the HN bubble that most B2B and B2C are on M365 and Entra, not Google like 3 devs in a cafe. Tailscale seems to understand the difference, but rather than going "enterprise" brings the startup ways into the business context, letting a business be like a startup while still complying with "requirements" such as sound patterns for tying into legacy internal and third party systems and networks.

A related difference is emphasis on "everything as code" from config to policy, enabling gitops of course, but also easier integration and automation.

That said, Firezone's choice to let groups flow from IdP and map resources to groups, can be a competitive advantage, since the only thing better than everything as code is no-code, meaning, no moving parts. For instance, with Firezone, you can make systems automatically accessible to Microsoft Teams, team by team. Adding someone to a team or kicking them from a team, can give them access or remove their access. That's a massive security gain and overhead reduction.

But the biggest differentiation seems to be solving corner cases that come up in real world use and rolling those out faster than firms can come up the curve in their own Zero Trust implementation. Tailscale must have an excellent forward-deployed product sensing practice, to either discover or listen to these problems from commercial users then tackle them and get it rolled out for all customers. Their docs are also use-case focused and self-service empowering: https://tailscale.com/kb/1300/production-best-practices with a clear understanding of how devs spend their time https://tailscale.com/kb/1360/developer-tools and generally organized by the "Diataxis" systematic approach to technical documentation authoring: https://diataxis.fr/

Finally, contrary to popular practice here, Tailscale don't have predatory pricing for SSO, no “SSO tax”.

The $0 plan includes SSO. Even if you're a one person shop, there's no reason not to get SSO going for yourself, every future SaaS you integrate with, and every future onboarding/offboarding will thank you. Switching to this later is far more costly than adopting it early, and we should all be supporting one another to make SSO (or Oauth2+OIDC) the norm instead of an "Enterprise Call Us" pricing discriminator.

It's great to see Firezone including OIDC in the starter plan, as that brings most of what anyone needs from "SSO", without most of the headaches. And this benefits Firezone too, they can't leak user passwords.

"Zero Trust" (such a terrible name for a pattern that actually means "enable trust on everything that matters") is a big deal, and more focus on this space is huge. It's worth building in this ecosystem, and worth paying attention to what overachievers are getting right.

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#47
At my last job, I implemented Firezone on AWS and it worked like a charm.

It was before the refactoring and the move to zero trust, so back then it was a simple admin panel. It was maybe mid 2022 I implemented it.

There was a terraform module I created for setting up the basic infrastructure, but there is no way the module supports the current state of the product. I guess it moved way quicker than I was able to follow LOL. The module was accepted in the Firezone group but later discontinued, for obvious reasons. I wish I had the time to contribute to the project supporting an official module for it, but I guess life happens to everyone haha

Good luck with the project! This is really good and very needed, the only other alternative being Tailscale, which is all closed source.

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#48
post #24
post #10

I'm a big fan of Tailscale but it's unfortunate that it's proprietary, so it's really nice to see an open source alternative. The commercial pricing also looks very reasonable. Wishing your product much success.

Do you think purchasers within enterprises especially care if it's a proprietary or commercially-supported FOSS offering?

Anecdotal but the company I work for does. But, not for the reasons the wider community cares.

Strong FOSS projects tend to have multiple options for commercial support. So, if a hostile company acquires your commercial support provider, looking at you Broadcom, you have some options to move to someone friendlier for support.

So, for my employer it is about having options.

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#49
post #20

In the spirit of constructive feedback, spend the time and effort to record your product demonstrations in a more professional environment. Or generate a fake background at a minimum.

I'd have definitely liked if the demo video was at least 1080p.

Re: Launch HN: Firezone (YC W22) – Zero-trust access platform built on WireGuard

#50
post #10

I'm a big fan of Tailscale but it's unfortunate that it's proprietary, so it's really nice to see an open source alternative. The commercial pricing also looks very reasonable. Wishing your product much success.

This comment sounds like a promo for Tailscale. It's actually a suggestion to Firezone to model after what Tailscale are getting right. We need competition in this space, but tooling non-SV businesses can leverage. Tailscale is pulling this off well. Tailscale is building a remarkable moat at extraordinary pace: capabilities real commercial use needs, on pricing that doesn't penalize the security-minded startup. One…

I prefer "End to End Security" or "Continuous Verification" to the Zero Trust term. But it seems the Zero Trust term is so ingrained now that everyone who has a product to sell will use it.
Post reply on HN