TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Transparent proxy server that works as a poor man's VPN

44 pointsby nxnfufuneznover 9 years ago

9 comments

rsyncover 9 years ago
I love sshuttle. You can point it at any ssh server (that has python installed on it) and you don&#x27;t need any special privileges on the remote end.<p>One problem is that it does <i>not</i> support DNS tunneling if FreeBSD is your client.[1]<p>Item: we (rsync.net) would be <i>willing to pay</i> for development that gets sshuttle to work properly and bulletproof on FreeBSD. In fact, we would be willing to pay for sshuttle development in general. Email us.[2]<p>Also, what is up with this new fork ... which speaks from the original authors point of view and, in fact, has his own personal notes cut and pasted into the README. In fact, the contact information is the original author - Avery Pennarun apenwarr@gmail.com - what&#x27;s going on here ?<p>[1] No, the note about IPFIREWALL_FORWARD does not fix this problem.<p>[2] info@rsync.net
评论 #10212667 未加载
评论 #10211771 未加载
jepatrickover 9 years ago
You can also just use a SSH to set up a socks proxy as well.<p><a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.jpatrick.io&#x2F;tube-socks&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.jpatrick.io&#x2F;tube-socks&#x2F;</a>
a5m0over 9 years ago
I see that this is a fork of a fork, what are the differences from the original?
rahimnathwaniover 9 years ago
Just use Shadowsocks, unless you&#x27;re on iOS, in which case use PPTP. These both work reliably for me, and with the latest versions of OSX.<p>If you need something more resistant to DPI, check out stunnel or obfsproxy as carriers for OpenVPN. Switch ports regularly as well. You needn&#x27;t change server config to do this: just use iptables to forward stuff so your server&#x27;s stunnel daemon is listening on hundreds of ports.
评论 #10211664 未加载
CSDudeover 9 years ago
If you want a poorer VPN, you can use socat [1] or n2n[2], which both works great!<p>1: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dest-unreach.org&#x2F;socat&#x2F;doc&#x2F;socat-tun.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dest-unreach.org&#x2F;socat&#x2F;doc&#x2F;socat-tun.html</a><p>2: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;N2n" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;N2n</a>
jpgvmover 9 years ago
Been using this for years, can be a little weird at times but usually works fairly well, even on OS X.
评论 #10211432 未加载
ausjkeover 9 years ago
I used this for a while in summer while I travelled to China, it worked shortly before the powerful GFW blocks it deadly, along with openvpn-over-443-port etc that I tried, which also failed soon after it&#x27;s used for a short while.
评论 #10211940 未加载
2bluescover 9 years ago
Why not just use OpenVPN? It&#x27;s just as simple (if not simpler) to setup and considerably more powerful.<p>An OpenVPN server can go from zero to done in under 5 minutes (for HN readers, less) with a Docker container: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;kylemanna&#x2F;github" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;kylemanna&#x2F;github</a>
评论 #10211762 未加载
评论 #10211763 未加载
austinchou0126over 9 years ago
Absolutely will not in China, LOL
评论 #10211736 未加载