Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

57305 readers

234 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

Torrenting:

Gaming:

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Should I run a VPN client side as well? (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Kinda want to keep this short. My Asus WRT router running Merlin firmware is currently handling my VPN connections & routing.

There is some part of me thinking if my providers servers go down my router may fallback to WAN, should I run an additional VPN connection on the device/server itself just in case?

It’s been about a year with this setup however this potential issue has been irking me.

Edit: Kill-switch is disabled on the router’s tunnels as it appears to be bugged in two ways. 1) any manual DNS settings get disregarded network-wide 2) it kills all network connections and not just the devices affected.

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 1 points 17 hours ago

What’s a good VPN service? Is Proton still good?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 days ago (1 children)

What are you hiding? /s

I think you could do that, but you will be further bottlenecking your bandwidth, and you will be adding an extra layer of complexity that could lead to unforeseen issues down the road.

Personally, I would just enable the kill switch, or run the VPN client side, but not double it up with 2 VPN’s.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Kind of seconding this, I can't speak for VPN routers, but i recently had a leak when I thought my kill switch was on and apparently something failed (probably me).

From now on I run both my PCs VPN as well as bind it directly to the torrent client. Same connection, just extra "kill switch" coverage.

Of course it all depends on how you want to do things/does all traffic need to route through a vpn/etc.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I only run my VPN client-side so that the rest of the traffic isn't affected.

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

Hm, in my current state I’ve configured my router to essentially route all bandwidth to the closest server my VPN provider offers. I utilize other tunnels for bypassing censorship and or torrenting.

So far the year has been solid, I think I’m going to keep chucking away down this path since it does reduce resources on my server.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 days ago

I run a gluetun docker (actually two, one local and one through Singapore) clientside which is generally regarded as pretty damn bulletproof kill switch wise. The arr stack etc uses this network exclusively. This means I can use foxyproxy to switch my browser up on the fly, bind things to tun0/tun1 etc, and still have direct connections as needed, it's pretty slick.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

I’d just stick with a kill switch.