[HN Gopher] OmniEdge - an Open source P2P layer 2 VPN infrastruc...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       OmniEdge - an Open source P2P layer 2 VPN infrastructure based on
       n2n protocol
        
       Author : fariszr
       Score  : 28 points
       Date   : 2022-08-04 14:47 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (omniedge.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (omniedge.io)
        
       | RL_Quine wrote:
       | Nothing about this website really gives a whole lot of
       | confidence. It claims to be "Started from US", but the broken
       | English that's prevalent on every single page says otherwise,
       | there's no information about what company is supposedly behind
       | its creation, and the webserver is behind cloudflare. Both the
       | git repo and the website proper are filled with broken links and
       | errors, text that does exist readably is close to complete
       | nonsense.
       | 
       | > _Traffic over OmniEdge is end-to-end encrypted by Twofish
       | /AES128/ChaCha20 cipers' P2P MESH network._
       | 
       | I'm grasping at straws to find a single thing which looks
       | legitimate about it. You'd have to be completely nuts to even
       | begin looking into this as a solution for anything.
       | 
       | If you're interested in what the technology behind this is, it's
       | just a thin veneer of https://github.com/ntop/n2n.
        
         | b1gl1on3 wrote:
         | Oh
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20210426155112/https://omniedge....
        
         | 1ark wrote:
         | The GitHub page is better.
         | https://github.com/omniedgeio/omniedge
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | api wrote:
         | > Twofish/AES128/ChaCha20
         | 
         | Supporting Twofish is really bizarre. It's basically dead and
         | would be slow compared to AES or ChaCha unless someone rolled
         | their own SIMD implementation (why?). AES128 is weird too since
         | 128-bit key ciphers are kind of deprecated unless your target
         | is a fridge magnet.
         | 
         | AES256 or ChaCha20 would be sane as they are both roughly
         | equivalent security-wise (in practice, people will debate
         | theory) and both still recommended for use in new stuff, but
         | most cryptographers would recommend that you pick one and only
         | one of these two for a new system unless something forces you
         | to support both.
         | 
         | So yeah, weirdness abounds here.
        
           | RL_Quine wrote:
           | Agreed. It's also super weird to have designed a new protocol
           | that supports multiple cipher suites, it's very well
           | established through the design of SSL and SSH now that there
           | is absolutely no place for cipher negotiation in protocols.
        
             | api wrote:
             | Yeah, right now any new protocol should pick either ChaCha
             | if you want to be fast on general purpose hardware and/or
             | be hipster certified or AES (256) if you want to be fast on
             | AES accelerated hardware and/or be FIPS(ter?) certified. I
             | can't think of a single reason to pick anything else right
             | now or to support negotiation.
        
               | RL_Quine wrote:
               | The reason negotiation is in this product is that the
               | underlying code is actually from 2008, which explains why
               | the cipher selection exists in the protocol, as well as
               | the inclusion of TwoFish.
        
           | sdeziel wrote:
           | > AES128 is weird too since 128-bit key ciphers are kind of
           | deprecated unless your target is a fridge magnet.
           | 
           | Why is AES128 preferred over AES256 by browsers then?
           | 
           | https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewClient.html?name=Chrome&.
           | .. https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/viewClient.html?name=Firef
           | ox...
        
             | RL_Quine wrote:
             | Technically it's slower, but absolutely meaninglessly so in
             | the context of browsers.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | nodomain wrote:
       | Started from US, built globally. Not build. English-as-a-second-
       | language speaker myself ;)
       | 
       | I tend to derive trust that I put into a product from spelling
       | errors, can't help.
        
       | dankai wrote:
       | How fast/performant is it in comparison to tailscale, nebula, and
       | wireguard (kernel module) ?
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | janandonly wrote:
       | Reminds me of Hamachi VPN from ~15 years ago.
       | 
       | https://vpn.net/
        
         | barking_dog wrote:
         | Oh, Hamachi. I started using n2n in some cases but nothing beat
         | the simplicity of setting up Hamachi.
        
           | 2Gkashmiri wrote:
           | maybe zerotier?
        
             | hyperionplays wrote:
             | +1 for zerotier
        
       | peanut-walrus wrote:
       | Wtf is a "Blockchain VPN" ?
        
         | _joel wrote:
         | Not sure, seems to be more like DHT for peer discovery to me,
         | but I really didn't spend a lot reading, hard pass from me.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-08-04 23:02 UTC)