Golliwog
My feedback
10 results found
-
69 votesGolliwog
supported this idea
·
-
1,046 votesGolliwog
supported this idea
·
-
74 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment -
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Golliwog
commented
I spoke to Proton support, the solution has already been implemented!
"Regarding the feature request, you should be able to use 10.3.0.1 for gateway/DNS, and 10.3.0.2 for your IP.
It also works for 10.4.0.x, 10.5.0.x, etc. (the important thing is that the gateway should be .1)"I have tested and confirmed the solution up to 10.8.0.x.
Also note, your Wireguard listening port (normally 51820) must be unique. I increment mine, eg. 51821, 51822, etc. for every additional connection. The peer port does not change.
An error occurred while saving the comment Golliwog
commented
The root of this issue is that all of ProtonVPNs Wireguard tunnels use the same network for clients on all servers - 10.2.0.2/32.
I suggest setting the Wireguard network to a random IP. For example: 10.2.0.{random}/32
Alternately, set the last octet to the server number in that country; eg. AU#66 would use 10.2.0.66/32
-
29 votesGolliwog
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Golliwog
commented
Tailscale is insecure if the coordination server is hosted by a third party. It effectively gives the coordination server access to someone's whole network.
With ProtonVPN, I hate that at home, from my Android phone, I cannot access my local network securely as I have to chose between Always-On VPN and 'LAN Connections'.
I think the above idea about using ProtonVPN with Tailscale exit nodes is based on a similar problem to me. I would suggest Proton looks at my root cause issue and cooks up a better custom solution.
I would love a solution to allow access to my home network (at home and away) with all my traffic routing through a ProtonVPN gateway. (Tailscale tech could be used as a starting point.)
-
17 votesGolliwog
supported this idea
·
-
11 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Golliwog
commented
This is critical. Proton should be conducting extra checks (eg. like the email missing attachments feature) to check for leaked email addresses.
Golliwog
supported this idea
·
-
15 votesGolliwog
supported this idea
·
-
814 votesGolliwog
supported this idea
·
-
173 votesGolliwog
supported this idea
·
This can be done with a box like pfSense. See https://protonvpn.com/support/pfsense-wireguard/
An issue arises when you have multiple VPNs using the same subnet. According to Proton support, multiple VPN connections from the same device are possible with this workaround:
"Regarding the feature request, you should be able to use 10.3.0.1 for gateway/DNS, and 10.3.0.2 for your IP.
It also works for 10.4.0.x, 10.5.0.x, etc. (the important thing is that the gateway should be .1)"
I have tested and confirmed the solution up to 10.8.0.x.
Also note, your Wireguard listening port (normally 51820) must be unique. I increment mine, eg. 51821, 51822, etc. for every additional connection. The peer port does not change.