Jump to content
TorGuard
  • 1
Support

WireGuard Window, Mac OS and Linux Beta 2

Rate this question

Question

Support

Hello,

We have a new build with bug fixes and a couple internal changes, now we include a linux build - please test guys, appreciated as a always.

ChangeLog:

====================================

- All platforms: Internal changes + Bug fixes
- All platforms: Disable legacy Internet Kill Switch
- MacOSX: Add Firewall restrictions

====================================

Downloads:

Windows: https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-setup-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test.exe
Mac: https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/TorGuard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5f8.test.dmg
Linux (x86_64, Ubuntu/Debian) : https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test-amd64.deb
Linux (x86_64, Fedore/CentOS): https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test-amd64.rpm

Regards

TorGuard

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Recommended Posts

  • 0
19807409

thx, this was very fast.

EDIT: links not working

Not Found

The requested URL /downloads/torguard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test-amd64.deb was not found on this server.

Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409
  • 0
Support

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409
42 minutes ago, Support said:

Thanks, not sure what happened there 🙂

Users fault :) , such things happen if process is not automated, mistakes happen, luckily we are still humans.

```/beta/``` was missing.

 

Installation went just fine, after enabling wireguard in client and trying to connect wireguard froze, it required client restart. I tested for now only 1 shared server.

Here are some quick speedtests with speedtest-cli (v2.1.2) with simply first 3 picked servers (one of them is lame). I am currently on mobile connection and moving, max speed promised by ISP for this connection is 150Mbits/50Mbits, used with Huawei P30 Pro over WLAN tethering:

Tests without VPN:

Magenta (5351)   NEXT LAYER (3199)   Nessus (3744)  
Down Up Down up Down up
81.19 Mbits/s 52.73 Mbits/s 122.03 Mbits/s 52.70 Mbits/s 115.75 Mbits/s 51.35 Mbits/s
122.38 Mbits/s 52.55 Mbits/s 116.24 Mbits/s 52.38 Mbits/s 120.33 Mbits/s 52.67 Mbits/s
95.29 Mbits/s 52.56 Mbits/s 121.07 Mbits/s 52.56 Mbits/s 117.33 Mbits/s 52.67 Mbits/s

Average:

         
99.62 Mbits/s 52.61 Mbits/s 119.78 Mbits/s 52.55 Mbits/s 117.80 Mbits/s 52.23 Mbits/s

 

Tests with wireguard VPN

Mageta (5351)   NEXT LAYER (3199)   Nessus (3744)  
Down Up Down up Down up
97.18 Mbits/s 48.17 Mbits/s 72.79 Mbits/s 48.59 Mbits/s 108.47 Mbits/s 47.93 Mbits/s
84.28 Mbits/s 48.61 Mbits/s 74.23 Mbits/s 48.67 Mbits/s 111.72 Mbits/s 48.74 Mbits/s
96.01 Mbits/s 48.68 Mbits/s 70.69 Mbits/s 46.65 Mbits/s 90.50 Mbits/s 47.92 Mbits/s

Average

92.49 Mbits/s 48.49 Mbits/s 72.57 Mbits/s 47.97 Mbits/s 103.56 Mbits/s 48.20 Mbits/s

 

 

How much loss do does VPN get compared

92.49 Mbits/s 48.49 Mbits/s 72.57 Mbits/s 47.97 Mbits/s 103.56 Mbits/s 48.20 Mbits/s

How big is a loss in percentage to results without VPN

7.16 % loss 7.84 % loss 39.41 % loss 8.71 % loss 12.09 % loss 7.72 % loss

 

 

Having ~7% loss of results compared with no VPN is very good result. As expected wireguard is very good and it is very stable, I moved over 20km during those tests, for quick test it is sufficient, but on stable connection I do think that with same hardware I would get around 7% loss for VPN connections.

 

After testing services it will be funny to test shared servers on some 10Gbit+ network.

 

I also was told wireguard works only with this client, will check it later, I do believe I can copy ip etc.. which I get and check it by using wireguard client, maybe some info of why it is not possible would be usefull to spare me looking up.

I did not check netflix and other services but assume them not to work as those ip's with other protocols do not work. I expected the same for wireguard servers listed under the account and for every single of tested netflix and prime (only on LG TV) worked.

I also see 2 processes when launching torguard, can you explain why there are two? Maybe I missed it in previous version/s, but I do not remember seeing two processes in my process list

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Zaheer
2 hours ago, Support said:

Hello,

We have a new build with bug fixes and a couple internal changes, now we include a linux build - please test guys, appreciated as a always.

ChangeLog:

====================================

- All platforms: Internal changes + Bug fixes
- All platforms: Disable legacy Internet Kill Switch
- MacOSX: Add Firewall restrictions

====================================

Downloads:

Windows: https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-setup-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test.exe
Mac: https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/TorGuard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5f8.test.dmg
Linux (x86_64, Ubuntu/Debian) : https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test-amd64.deb
Linux (x86_64, Fedore/CentOS): https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test-amd64.rpm

Regards

TorGuard

The NY server on WireGuard don't get connected from Dubai, UAE. It just says "Reconnection" waited for 2 minutes but no connection. So using NJ server.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Support
7 minutes ago, Zaheer said:

The NY server on WireGuard don't get connected from Dubai, UAE. It just says "Reconnection" waited for 2 minutes but no connection. So using NJ server.

 

I can confirm, will have fixed tomorrow - thanks

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409

I can confirm it too, NewYork is not working right now, other US servers tested and are working. It also requires quite a lot longer for me to connect to UAE server compared to other servers which are not closer to me.
There are some other marginal things, warnings etc..., here a QT one:

[2020-08-08 2:35:03.893 CEST W] QFontDatabase: Cannot find font directory /opt/torguard/lib/fonts.
Note that Qt no longer ships fonts. Deploy some (from https://dejavu-fonts.github.io/ for example) or switch to fontconfig.
[2020-08-08 2:41:42.486 CEST D] WhatIsMyLocation/doQueryMyLocation: HTTP request failed: "Host updates.torguard.biz not found" - HTTP error code: 0

After several connect, disconnects my routes are messed up and interface (wlan currently) has to be restarted (or manually restoring/clearing everything). However, I will have to test it on proper connection, current one over wlan tethering with my phone is not ideal for testing, however, it confirms at least that wireguard works properly also in such scenario.

That would be it for now, no further errors.

@Support is this public info how to use: https://8x.xxx.xxx.xxx:1443/api/v1? If yes, where can I find api call list?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409
3 hours ago, Support said:

- All platforms: Internal changes + Bug fixes
- All platforms: Disable legacy Internet Kill Switch

this is misleading statement, it should probably mean "All TG client supported platforms"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Boopa-dee

Is the Interface kill switch gone for good or is it just for the Beta? since I use it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
zerotikin
59 minutes ago, Support said:

 

I can confirm, will have fixed tomorrow - thanks

 

Any news about Brazil servers?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409
10 minutes ago, zerotikin said:

Any news about Brazil servers?

Sao Paulo 1 works, Sao Paulo 2 does not for me.

grafik.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
zerotikin
1 hour ago, 19807409 said:

Sao Paulo 1 works, Sao Paulo 2 does not for me.

grafik.png

 

OK thank you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
jpgk82

Why not have one thread for the beta and upload pinned/top post as new version released or update in app

i am still following this one and only because i seen a thread on reddit i know there is a new beta 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409
2 hours ago, jpgk82 said:

Why not have one thread for the beta and upload pinned/top post as new version released or update in app

It actually does not disturb me if linux build is in separate thread from windows one, especially taken in mind that those releases are different by their build number which might mean it is a different test, windows thread is already now much longer with actually less information.

 

On other side you might be right, it would maybe be a better overview for some readers but in real honest, if you have windows you do not want to read pages about linux issues which users might have, same goes other way around, in fact, I would even split Mac version to separate thread and would insist them to release Android beta which would be way more better :) invested time than moving folders around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
jpgk82

Yeah if they have a threads for each OS be neater and easier to keep track of new version at relevant to what you have

 

Shame they can't do something where you get update notifications and can update in app.

I know not possible if/when android comes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409
7 minutes ago, jpgk82 said:

Shame they can't do something where you get update notifications and can update in app.

Agree on some points, maybe it would not be good to have OS separated, but architecture separated.

About update, I do agree about releases which in fact do tell a user about update in TG client. Beta releases should be not notified as available update as it is not stable.

Separating channels into development and stable (maybe even more) would let them to notify user on development channel that there is beta update, the one using stable release will be notified only if stable release update is available.

As for linux, TG already got a note that they should maybe use some deployment and distribution systems, like snap which in fact lets you use also LivePatch which in fact spares you running update as your snaps are updated in the background, you simply need to relaunch your client and it is always latest available version.

Windolls and Mac users do not have ability to run this feature, Windolls SuperDuper devs simply took it out of WSL support some time ago, not sure they will reenable it as everybody would then use :) linux on windolls without to know it, haha.

However, just wanted to let you know that torguard works on that already since some time, dont expect it to be released soon, now this client is priority to get released.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
jpgk82
2 minutes ago, 19807409 said:

Agree on some points, maybe it would not be good to have OS separated, but architecture separated.

About update, I do agree about releases which in fact do tell a user about update in TG client. Beta releases should be not notified as available update as it is not stable.

Separating channels into development and stable (maybe even more) would let them to notify user on development channel that there is beta update, the one using stable release will be notified only if stable release update is available.

As for linux, TG already got a note that they should maybe use some deployment and distribution systems, like snap which in fact lets you use also LivePatch which in fact spares you running update as your snaps are updated in the background, you simply need to relaunch your client and it is always latest available version.

Windolls and Mac users do not have ability to run this feature, Windolls SuperDuper devs simply took it out of WSL support some time ago, not sure they will reenable it as everybody would then use :) linux on windolls without to know it, haha.

However, just wanted to let you know that torguard works on that already since some time, dont expect it to be released soon, now this client is priority to get released.

I meant like Windows mac Linux and android in their own thread, OS probably wrong wording 

I agree about update channel, if needs be in app option or just whatever version is installed can only update to that channel

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Kratos

Windows 10

1) Connecting feels a bit more snappy/fluid.  

2) No longer leaking DNS according to dnsleaks.com

3) NYC server still not working.  NJ is adequate but quadranet is very inconsistent even with openvpn.  

4) When returning from overnight hibernation, the app crashes and icon disappears from system tray on right side taskbar, however the wireguard tunnel is still active as evident by the TG iplocation check in a browser and the log from the Wireguard app.

Question for the devs:
Is it possible in windows to have the ability to switch wireguard servers and dns servers on the fly like in the Android app?  Would be great to be able to right click on the system tray icon and select another wireguard server to connect to or change dns server. 

What happens if we update the Wireguard app independently of the Torguard installer? Should this not be done and if so will you include a warning in the app?

Can't wait to test this on our dedicated streaming/residential IPs.

Edited by Kratos
clarification of dedicated servers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409

Dedicated servers can be used with wireguard in TG client. Check your logs for wireguard port used (for shared servers it is 1443), then add it as dedicated server. As soon as applied on 10Gbit network and stream/sports/etc.. ip's, then you can add those too, I tested now 10Gbit and stream IP where it is either not enabled or uses different port for now, I guess it is simply not deployed for now on those servers.

With that test if wireguard on tg client works with dedicated servers is passed. Hope to see soon 10Gbit and stream ip's enabled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Kratos

Edited original post to clarify my "dedicated ip" comment above.  I meant the streaming/residential. 

I did see that port in the logs and have been using it to connect to a NYC direct IP since the last beta but for some reason the main NYC server (hostname most likely) in the pre-configured drop down doesn't work.  

Overall I'm impressed with wireguard speed thru TG and can't wait for wireguard to be officially added to pfSense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409

@Support how can we test port forwarding? I tested quite a lot, just am not able to test incoming ports (like SIP and alternative HTTP on TCP and RTP/RDP UDP ports).

Following tested now on all servers and are working without any issues, calls do not break, everything works perfectly, those are which I kept testing since yesterday:

tcp outgoing: 585,993,9001,6881,80,995,587,465,5060,554,21,53,22,143,25,110

udp outgoing: 27005, 7082, 500, 5005, 7078, 53, 5004, 5060,27015,554, 123

 

I also did not experience any DNS issues except for logging into FICS servers, that is still not possible.

For everybody else who wants to test all those things quickly or even in multiple tests, try RTR's speedtest, if you are far away it will not give you full speed but will make those other tests. I actually like them because you can set it up and run multiple tests easily.

Single test: https://www.netztest.at/de/Test

Repeat mode: https://www.netztest.at/de/Loop

@Kratos I agree with you :), I 💘 TorGuard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409

Nice, M247 servers work very, very well with my ISP and wireguard. ISP gives 250/50, normally it pends between 200-240 on download and 47-49 on upload.

Speedtest shows quite amazing result :), I made few which result again in being faster than the max. provided by my ISP:

9883811203.png 9883812087.png 9883812985.png 9883813970.png 9883815025.png 9884400203.png 9884473561.png 9883811203.png

So, to compare it I launched RTR repeating test and bang, it is even faster and more stable, waiting it to complete and will post the endresult, but first 3 are quite stable:

RTR-3-Tests.png.45305af408cf3ee4c99a19a63fcecd2b.png

Here are links for those first 4:

forumsmall.png forumsmall.png forumsmall.png forumsmall.png  

In fact, here TorGuard connection with wireguard boosts my max. possible speed provided by my ISP by 5-15% here where if no VPN is used,  ISP gives only 80-90% of prommised speed, it spikes rarely over 95% and is never over 98%. Difference is 15-35% boost compared to real speeds which ISP offers, hehe, my ISP seems to need some more staff, this clearly is on their cap ;)

Here is Open-User-UUID where you can see all those tests when they finish so I can spare posting/updating this post.

RTR-Speedtest-first.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
19807409

@Support despite different attempts to delete the image on the bottom of last post it still appears to me, please delete it if you can

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Zaheer
On 8/8/2020 at 1:51 AM, Support said:

Hello,

We have a new build with bug fixes and a couple internal changes, now we include a linux build - please test guys, appreciated as a always.

ChangeLog:

====================================

- All platforms: Internal changes + Bug fixes
- All platforms: Disable legacy Internet Kill Switch
- MacOSX: Add Firewall restrictions

====================================

Downloads:

Windows: https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-setup-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test.exe
Mac: https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/TorGuard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5f8.test.dmg
Linux (x86_64, Ubuntu/Debian) : https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test-amd64.deb
Linux (x86_64, Fedore/CentOS): https://torguard.net/downloads/beta/torguard-v3.99.4-pre.87+gc6865c5.test-amd64.rpm

Regards

TorGuard

On MacOS 10.15.6 so far Beta 2 version has no bugs, for the past 2 days of usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
kx9134

I can't seem to get wireguard to show for me despite enabling it in the settings. I'm on Linux mint. Is it because my kernel is not 5.6? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...