Leaderboard

A newcomer, it seems. I'd give them a bit more time to develop everything. So far: Server country selection is mostly sound – if you ignore things like UAE and Brazil. Support for all relevant protocols, which is nice. Wireguard caveats are in privacy policy instead of FAQ, which is weird, but okay, it's there. Moving on. Closed source software. Yellow flag. No Linux means general focus on revenue. Didn't check any of them; how should I, anyway? Microsoft and Google crash reporting services in software. Yellow flag. Would've appreciated something open sourcey and selfhosted like sentry.io. Mention of a warrant canary again. Still not sure if they work.. I think an expert would choose a firewall over application-based killswitch functionality any day, this hasn't happened here. A bit sad, but maybe driven by the general VPN user base always looking at a killswitch feature in a VPN service app, and not understanding that firewalls are more robust, even if somewhat more difficult to setup and troubleshoot. Trifle: Some of the FAQ answers are not updated or even checked for spelling, grammar and logic. On Static or Dedicated IP address? for example both dynamic and static addresses are ruled out, even with a lexical syntax error, creating the potential for confusion. Then, privacy policy: "We log your usage, and if we think you're naughty, we will contact you. If we couldn't reach you, we will terminate access. If we could, your answers can and will be used against you." Sounds liberating, still want to torrent with WeVPN? We can say that a working mail is required. But above all I found this one downright hilarious: At least they're aware how that guy ranks VPN services, they're happy to provide him with a template. Same rules apply: I can simply set up a new VPN service, promise him everything and more and it'd be the best in the market!

@Flx The first message was approved by some moderator in the wrong thread, not a big deal. Then we moved the message on its own thread, this one. Then user "wireguard" posted more messages which were all approved by some moderator. @Brainbleach Of course. We were replying to "wireguard" who invites surreptitiously to punish AirVPN because AirVPN uses and develops actively OpenVPN: "Needless to say, investing in AirVPN means investing in OpenVPN, and that's not acceptable to me at this point," . He/she also kept claiming that "it's time to retire OpenVPN" (sic), that OpenVPN is a "truly disgusting hack" (sic) and so on,. showing his/her embarrassing ignorance and lack of good faith. Nothing to do with your messages. Funny how bogus account writers are so eager to become from time to time AirVPN software lead developers, general managers for AirVPN strategies, marketing directors and more. 😀 We wanted to prove beyond any reasonable doubt that his/her claim are unreasonable and based on wrong assumptions and terrible omissions, showing how Wireguard can not replace OpenVPN for a significant percentage of our customers and how our OpenVPN development has been beneficial for many users around the world. That said, we claimed that Wireguard needed to be developed and tested further years ago, so at the time our claim was totally reasonable. We also claimed years ago that the problem was not with CHACHA20 which to the best of nowadays knowledge is a very robust and secure cipher. Now the problems are different because Wireguard is asked to offer something which it was not designed for, i.e. providing some kind of anonymity layer. Such problems include lack of DNS push, lack of dynamic IP address assignment (with subsequent problems with client key-private address static correspondence, a very tough legal problem for us but above all for our customers), need of keeping client real IP address stored in a file. We have resolved them one by one with external software and internal work around. Once the problems are resolved in a robust way, which means testing thoroughly the adopted work-around, we can offer Wireguard, not earlier. Kind regards

Last update: 16 May 2018 - Related to version: Eddie 2.14.4 Any Linux distribution has at least:a different graphics server (X11, Wayland)a different desktop environment (GNOME, KDE, LXTE etc.)a package manager with a specific format (deb, rpm, tar.xf etc.)a different packaging signature for trust and securitya different method to obtain administrative privileges, required by advanced features of Eddie (also because OpenVPN requires them)a different set of packages used by our client, that sometimes have different names (for example 'stunnel4' under Debian, 'stunnel' for Fedora)maybe a different DNS management.We are working at our best to support every kind of configuration managed by our source code directly, when possible. Tested without known issuesDebian (tested 7/8/9)Ubuntu (18.04 GNOME tested)Ubuntu Mate (18.04 tested)Devuan (tested Ascii)MintArch (XFCE tested)Fedora (28 tested) With minimal issuesopenSUSE (Tumbleweed KDE tested) openSUSE (Tumbleweed GNOME tested) Works, with no tray icon.Elementary Works, but tray icon, web and folder links don't work. Fatal issues None known. Tech notesSometimes Tray icon works, but it is not shown because the desktop environment hides it. For example, latest GNOME may require a separate shell extension (generally TopIcons).Currently Eddie 2.x under Linux requires root privileges (like GParted or Synaptic Manager). Elevation is generally obtained with a polkit policy file (pkexec) if installed, otherwise fallback methods are used when available (gksu, kdesu, beesu etc.). When the UI runs as root, there are four -optional- actions that are performed as normal user: tray icon, notifications, open web links and open file folders. If it is not possible to act as a normal user, such actions are not performed at all. A totally separated UI (as a normal user) vs. root-actions (as root user, service or separate process) is currently under development. Needed improvementsMinimal lintian warnings on .deb editionGeneral info details on .deb edition (for example, reporting Proprietary as License, not true.)General info details on .rpm edition (for example, reporting Proprietary as License, not true.)Create official package for AUR and other distributions.Create packages also for CLI-only edition.Create packages based on direct source compilation.Procedures to include Eddie in official/standard repository