it's on the front page:
"All software runs on ports that have been deliberately chosen to make
simplistic port blocking unrealistic without causing massive collateral damage.
OpenVPN, for example, does not run on its default port of 1194, but instead
uses port 636, the standard port for LDAP/SSL
On Wednesday, 7 September 2016 14:08:16 UTC+1, Connor Page wrote:
> agree, when I looked at it some time ago I could not imagine why I would need
> all of that. too large an attack surface for my taste. however, I did
> investigate what individual elements are capable of and borrowed some ideas,
agree, when I looked at it some time ago I could not imagine why I would need
all of that. too large an attack surface for my taste. however, I did
investigate what individual elements are capable of and borrowed some ideas,
like using port 636 and tls-auth for openvpn.
--
You received this me
amadaus:
> Hi
> Some of you may be interested in setting up your own personal VPN using
> streisand software? I first read obout this in Ars Technica [
> http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/06/aiming-for-anonymity-ars-assesses-the-state-of-vpns-in-2016/]
> and have since tried it out in a dedicate
Hi
Some of you may be interested in setting up your own personal VPN using
streisand software? I first read obout this in Ars Technica [
http://arstechnica.com/security/2016/06/aiming-for-anonymity-ars-assesses-the-state-of-vpns-in-2016/]
and have since tried it out in a dedicated Streisand VM.
To
