neatchee

Can’t argue against going with what you know :D

Just get one of their latest models. They’re all solid. Whatever is in your budget.

Right? Especially when I had symmetric gigabit (rip marital home before divorce) it was such a game changer. Still great with 1000/50 docsis just not quite as great lol

It also took me a bit to realize GL-iNet is just a custom openwrt stack and you can reach the luci console for advanced tinkering :3

Brave of you to assume I’m human.

…I mean, I am human, but it’s brave to assume

😂

If you’re already running OpenWRT then I personally recommend Wireguard over tailscale if you have the time. It’s not hard to set up at all and takes the third party out of the loop. OpenWRT has excellent support for Wireguard configuration and export of configs to the devices you want to connect (install client, import config). The only “gotcha” is needing DynamicDNS (assuming you don’t have a static public IP)

Tailscale is definitely super-simple but this IS the self-hosted community ;D I always prefer removing third parties at every opportunity.

You have several options.

First important question, though: what type of router do you have? If you own your own router, instead of using the one provided by your ISP, then you may have additional options.

1. Tailscale VPN - Quick and easy setup. “Just works”. Creates an environment like your computers are connected to the same network. Requires setup on each device. Some limits on free plan.
2. *Wireguard VPN (router host) - Configuration required at the router. Only remote devices need additional setup; devices at home don’t need individual config. *Must be supported by router
3. SSH tunnel - Ideal for terminal only, though X11 forwarding is possible. Requires either a router that has an SSH server, or port forwarding. Not recommended to allow username/password-only auth; should configure for key-based auth (rsa256/ed25519) only
4. Secure Remote Desktop (hosted service) - TeamViewer and similar services provide remote desktop access through account-based login, using their relays. Theoretically secure but susceptible to account takeover attacks.
5. Secure Remote Desktop (direct connect or self-hosted service) - Relay-less (e.g. NoMachine) and self-hosted relay (e.g. RustDesk) provide secure, self managed remote desktop. Requires router port forwarding or reverse-proxy configuration at the router.

There are other options (like OpenVPN or Wireguard hosted on a device internal to the network, rather than the router) but I personally recommend one of the above 5 options depending on your use case and risk profile.

If you travel a lot, consider purchasing a travel router (eg GL-iNet devices). Once configured, they act as a repeater or access point for your devices, including forwarding all traffic over a VPN. You arrive at your destination, plug in the travel router, use its webUI to connect it to the hotel or guest Wi-Fi of your choice, and then connect all your personal devices to its Wi-Fi network. No need for connecting every device to a new network at each destination. They support captive portal login, AdGuard Home baked in, blocking all non-VPN traffic, and more.

Working as intended. Their goal is not a payday.

There is a corporate friendly way to handle this discussion. Here, I’ll even write it for you:

"Hi [Team],

Thanks for reaching out again about this issue.

I have made two previous attempts to provide guidance on this matter, but my recommendation was dismissed without appropriate consideration due to first-impression aesthetics of a product that is provided for free by a small team of dedicated nerds.

I attempted to explain that a corporate-friendly paid version exists but never got that far in our conversation due to your team’s outright dismissal of the product I know to be both effective and appropriate for your use case.

Due to these circumstances, and your team’s apparent priorities, I recommend you pursue an expensive contract with CloudFlare.

If you change your mind and would like to revisit this matter, I’m happy to set up a meeting to present the details.

Best of luck,

-Ek-Hou-Van-Braai

Sounds like you work with a bunch of short-sighted, judgemental simpletons who cannot look past initial aesthetics for a product that has nothing to do with aesthetics.

Tbh I would run far the fuck away from that company if they can’t be bothered to sit down for a meeting where you explain that it’s an open-source project run by an extremely small team of nerds and that there is a commercial product available without the branding issues.

Everything you’re describing about your employer/coworkers gives me giant red-flag warnings regarding their decision making process.

Time to start looking for a new employer, or accept that they’re idiots and next time they ask about bots tell them “I’ve tried explaining this already but you dismissed me for silly reasons, so go pay for CloudFlare and stop bothering me”.

OMG finally the best video on the internet is CONTEXTUALLY RELEVANT

https://youtu.be/GQw-aEk05qY

winget on its own, yeah, I agree scoop is better. But toss UniGetUI at it and suddenly it’s a real package manager.

And UniGetUI supports multiple sources: winget, msstore, pip, .net tools, chocolatey, scoop, etc

I do wish winget was more robust on it’s own but I also appreciate the goal of getting the package handling right first and letting third parties handle the update automation, at least for now.

I’m naively optimistic that after another 5 years baking it’ll be closer to what I actually want

I know this is a Linux community and therefore we love to hate on Windows…

but for anyone that hasn’t used Windows in a while, they actually finally implemented relatively decent package manager in the form of “winget”. When you add the wonderful UniGetUI on top of it you get a pretty good experience.

It had issues early on with consistency but the last ~year or two has seen it get a ton of improvement. It’s much more reliable than it used to be.

Obviously “it’s about goddamn time” and it doesn’t hold a candle to mature package manager like what’s available on Linux.

But if you’ve not experienced it before, and are forced to use Windows sometimes, it’s worth checking out.

My point was not well communicated: I was joking that this tech, which is already perfectly useful, might actually turn out to be more accurate for gamers despite the idea of using this device without a need being apparently absurdist, because our tongues are much more dextrous than people realize.

As babies we put everything in our mouths. Your tongue knows what everything would feel like. For large parts of human history it was normal to put an unknown object in your mouth to investigate it (the species eventually caught on that this is dangerous).

It was a poorly worded joke about tongues

Ok this is obviously ridiculous but your tongue is actually really dextrous so it might be functional, if complete absurd.

As someone who works in this problem space, I promise you with 100% certainty that the type and quantity of data collection being done without kernel access would be far more distasteful than what’s done with kernel access. You can take my word for that or not but I obviously can’t say any more than that

Including cheating functionality in games is already done and people hate it: it’s called pay-to-win microtransactions.

The archetypes for cheaters are such that they don’t provide ways to please the a large portion of cheaters without harming players because harm is their goal. And the other group is trying to make money by charging for services for players and then cheating to complete those services as fast as possible. There are no in-game features that can be created to mitigate these people.

The only class of cheaters that can be dealt with as a service problem are those that are cheating to a) catch up to others or b) offset a skill shortfall or c) offset a time shortfall. This makes up only a subset of an cheaters

Only some cheaters are a service problem. There are a number of different cheater archetypes and some of them do not respond to service offerings

And believe it or not, while kernel level provides a level of access that could be used for nefarious spying we actually do much MORE stuff people would find distasteful when we DON’T have kernel access, because we have to infer more without direct access to the places where cheat makers do their work

I want you to know that I literally work in this space and you are handwaving away an incredibly complex problem space that hundreds of smart people have been trying to solve for decades now and it’s only getting harder (good cheat suites use hypervisor mods and direct memory access kits these days). I would love to educate this community but I’m under NDA (in addition to not wanting to provide information that attackers can use to better understand how we approach this problem space)

Are you a videogame networking engineer? Because you’ve just handwaved away one of the most difficult challenges in gaming as if it were “duh that’s easy” level simple.

I can link you some GDC videos that talk about how hard this problem is if you want

ETA: Also you’ve only addressed memory modification attacks. This does not address external aimbots that read memory to determine enemy player position and then send legitimate-but-automated inputs to aim and shoot. How do you stop cheaters from doing this when they can see exactly how data is structured in memory, how values are obfuscated, etc?

Open source competitive multiplayer games would be catastrophically compromised.