Re:Google Adds WireGuard VPN to Android 12’s Linux Kernel 5....
by atonse on Monday October 19, 2020 @02:05PM
(#24829024)
I actually just got done reading the thread. That was an interesting read.
This has happened a few times. First with TunSafe, I think it also happened with CloudFlare's WG implementation, etc. The idea that a third party unsupported implementation shouldn't count.
I think this is a case of the message being lost in the tone. As a user of Wireguard, I definitely don't want to think about whether this is an official implementation. But having many competing implementations is exactly what would cause confusion (imagine a news article talking about how someone overcame a Wireguard exploit to get into a network).
It's like having 20 different apps that claim to be compatible with Signal. I'd have no idea which ones have gotten the same amount of rigorous testing. Fragmentation in these kinds of areas (especially when the original project is itself open source and hasn't stagnated) can often make things worse by causing even a little bit of doubt or hesitation.
This has happened a few times. First with TunSafe, I think it also happened with CloudFlare's WG implementation, etc. The idea that a third party unsupported implementation shouldn't count.
I think this is a case of the message being lost in the tone. As a user of Wireguard, I definitely don't want to think about whether this is an official implementation. But having many competing implementations is exactly what would cause confusion (imagine a news article talking about how someone overcame a Wireguard exploit to get into a network).
It's like having 20 different apps that claim to be compatible with Signal. I'd have no idea which ones have gotten the same amount of rigorous testing. Fragmentation in these kinds of areas (especially when the original project is itself open source and hasn't stagnated) can often make things worse by causing even a little bit of doubt or hesitation.