47
a VPN that is easily self-hostable and resistant to blocking? (eviltoast.org)
submitted 7 months ago by to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
36 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Hi, i'm looking for a VPN that:

  • is easily deployable via a docker-compose
  • has an Android App and it doesn't drain the battery too much
  • hides as regular HTTPS traffic so it's not blockable by Firewalls. (I don't need strong censorship resistance; it just has to work in offices and hotel WiFis.)
  • Bonus: A server like caddy can also accept HTTPS traffic for some regular websites next to the VPN server.

https://github.com/TrustTunnel/TrustTunnel sounds interesting, but the PR for docker compose was closed.

Do you know something else?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -1 points 7 months ago (5 children)

Many of the prominent https VPN protocols are for evading the great firewall of China. OP had that as a requirement, so it is not an unreasonable assumption.

If you are evading less locked down firewalls, then you don't need as stealthy VPNs.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 7 months ago* (4 children)

    Many of the prominent https VPN protocols are for evading the great firewall of China. OP had that as a requirement

    OP said exactly the opposite. Where the fuck do you get this stuff?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 7 months ago* (3 children)

    hides as regular HTTPS traffic so it’s not blockable by Firewalls

    From OP's post, of course. If OP does not need to evade firewalls that are that aggressive, then they should have settled for a less stealthy VPN solution, as many of these HTTPS proxy solutions have performance and usability (can often only proxy TCP traffic) tradeoffs.

    Perhaps they have already tried the wireguard on port 443 solution, and it didn't work for them. My high school would auto detect and block wireguard to any port. Perhaps they are in a similar situation.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 1 point 7 months ago (2 children)

    I haven't tried WG on 443/udp yet. On my last UK journey I had it on the default WG port and it was blocked a few times. Will try 443/udp @ homelab next time. Every other advanced obfuscating solution sounds pretty complicated and I'm not sure if there will be time to handle this during a journey.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •