Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
In this context, “no-UWP” simply means that a few classes unavailable on Windows 7 are excluded from this build. These classes are specifically used for Toast notifications and checking for new releases on GitHub. Aside from these exclusions, the builds are identical.
С этим действительно существует ряд сложностей. В целом, добавить еще один или несколько тоннелей в так называемом прозрачном режиме несложно: пакеты в этом случае маршрутизируются вручную. Однако сделать то же самое в режиме с виртуальными адаптерами гораздо сложнее. Для каждого адаптера добавляются соответствующие записи в таблицу маршрутизации, что может создать значительную путаницу, и определить, на какой адаптер в итоге пойдет трафик, будет очень сложно. Скорее всего, придется ограничиться одним сетевым интерфейсом, а для дополнительных тоннелей использовать трансляцию адресов. Дополнительно возникают сложности с конфигурированием, приоритезацией, поддержкой в UI и т.д.
В общем, работы много, а свободного времени у меня очень мало.☺️
Thank you for your kind words. I believe users are requesting a specific ‘kill switch’ UI control. For instance, the official WireGuard for Windows includes a checkbox for this feature, which impacts the AllowedIPs settings.
Regarding the notifications, I noticed that you are using a WireSock UI build without UWP. This version lacks certain features, including notifications, and was designed for compatibility with Windows 7.
Hi Roberts,
Thank you for your question.
This is how VPNs are generally designed. However, the WireSock VPN Client allows you to stay connected to both your LAN and VPN simultaneously through split tunneling features. This should enable you to access both networks without issue.
It’s worth noting that the WireSock VPN Client is currently only available for Windows and does not have a client for smartphones.
I hope this helps.
While the WireSock client does not support this feature at the moment, it looks interesting and aligns with some of our future goals. I am considering a configuration deployment system that would involve an appliance on the server side and support in the WireSock client.
Currently, you would need to create and configure the client files manually. However, the idea of automatically generating client WireGuard files and making adjustments for specific IP assignments is compelling. I will keep this in mind for future developments.
I’ve heard about it and I’m genuinely interested in exploring it further. However, my schedule is quite tight, and I’m not sure if I’ll have enough time to dedicate to it.
I have some ideas about what might be happening and just need to allocate some time to address this issue. I also suspect the problem does not occur in Transparent Mode (without the -lac command line switch). Can you confirm this?
The setup depends on the type of machine you intend to use for the WireGuard server. If you’re using a Windows machine, you can set it up with WireSock VPN Gateway. I’ve personally set up several Intel NUC machines with Windows for personal use using it. If you’re using a Linux machine, I recommend using this script to install and manage your WireGuard server.
Please check this post https://www.ntkernel.com/wireguard-vpn-server-on-windows/
EthernetBridge was originally not intended for production use. However, wrapping it into a Windows service should not be a major issue. The service could be designed to read parameters from a configuration file or accept them via the command line.
However, I must mention that finding spare time to implement this might be challenging for me at the moment.
Если вопрос касается https://github.com/wiresock/WireSockUI, то в проекте пока нет русской локализации. Интерфейс достаточно простой, и пока не возникала острая необходимость в переводе. Однако, возможно, стоит рассмотреть добавление языковых локализаций в будущем. 🤔
Uninstalling already accomplishes this, except it does not call pnputil to remove the driver package from the system.
I believe a viable solution is possible, but it will require some development effort. If the system prefers using IPv6 DNS and there is no IPv6 DNS address in the tunnel configuration, we can potentially extract the DNS query from the IPv6 packet, package it into IPv4, and send it to an IPv4 DNS server. The reverse operation would need to be performed for the system to receive an IPv6 DNS response.
I will try to allocate time to work on this, but my current schedule is quite tight due to other commitments.
Hello Anton,
It seems there’s a bit of a misunderstanding. During the installation process, a single virtual network adapter is set up. This adapter is only renamed and configured (assigned an IP address, etc.) based on the tunnel configuration. However, these operations usually require elevated privileges, so WireSock in virtual adapter mode needs to be run as an administrator. If you can’t run it as an administrator, you can use WireSock in transparent mode instead.
In transparent mode, the virtual network adapter isn’t activated. Instead, it intercepts traffic from the default network interface and sends it over the tunnel. This way, you can run WireSock as a normal user and configure your default network adapter as private.
I hope this helps! If you have any more questions or need further assistance, feel free to ask.
