News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits. Parent comment

Re:VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits by supermatt on Saturday December 13, 2025 @11:37PM (#46260788)
> Wireguard and remove Apple and Tailscale from the equation entirely

I agree you could send them a preconfigured pi, but can we stop pretending talescale is just wireguard - there is a lot of convenience in the NAT traversal that you otherwise need router config and/or a publically routable server to achieve.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits by drnick1 on Saturday December 13, 2025 @11:48PM (#46260818)
> but can we stop pretending talescale is just wireguard

That's precisely the issue. It introduces additional centralized dependencies and closed source components.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits by TimeBearingDown on Sunday December 14, 2025 @12:08AM (#46260898)
Good thing there’s headscale.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits by supermatt on Monday December 15, 2025 @07:09AM (#46273447)
And you will introduce a centralised dependency by using wireguard too - at least one of the hosts needs to be accessible from the other(s).
[ Parent | on HN ]