Privacy

31975 readers

241 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don't promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)

Related communities

Chat rooms

[Matrix/Element]Dead
Discord

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

sharing my simple wireguard kill-switch for Linux (lemmings.world)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmings.world/post/8926396

In light of the recent TunnelVision vulnerability I wanted to share a simple firewall that I wrote for wireguard VPNs.

https://codeberg.org/xabadak/wg-lockdown

If you use a fancy official VPN client from Mullvad, PIA, etc, you won't need this since most clients already have a kill switch built in (also called Lockdown Mode in Mullvad). This is if you use a barebones wireguard VPN like me, or if your VPN client has a poorly-designed kill switch (like NordVPN, more info here).

A firewall should mitigate the vulnerability, though it does create a side-channel that can be exploited in extremely unlikely circumstances, so a better solution would be to use network namespaces (more info here). Unfortunately I'm a noob and I couldn't find any scripts or tools to do it that way.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Isn't gluetun for docker? Are there people running it on the host system?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (3 children)

Just use its proxy for the host system's needs...

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (2 children)

How do you route all a host system's traffic through Gluetun? If you use routing tables, wouldn't it similarly be affected by TunnelVision? In which case you would still need a firewall on the host...

Also, the host system likely makes network requests right after boot, before a Gluetun container has time to start. How do you make sure those don't leak?

I am curious though, how you were able to route all host traffic through Gluetun. I know it can be used as a http/socks proxy, but I only know of ways to configure your browser to use that. What about other applications and system-level services? What about other kinds of traffic, like ssh?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

I don't route all my system's traffic through Gluetun, my threat model doesn't need it, I just route relevant apps, e.g. package management is in the clear but firefox, SearXNG, and nicotine go via gluetun. SSH can look after itself, or I'm in dire trouble. If my threat model did need it, I'd be considering a similar solution to yours, but it'd be heavily cribbed from the known good of gluetun, basically the docker (podman) put to bare metal.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago

Yeah, it does come down to threat model and preference. If you only need to route specific apps, Gluetun sounds like a great solution.