Jump to content
TorGuard

wireguard logs

Rate this topic


retslag1

Recommended Posts

retslag1

Was just curious how TG gets around the fact that wireguard requires IP logs to be kept? My understanding of this is rudimentary but this is what I've read. Sorry if this has been posted, I did a search and didn't see anything

Link to post
Share on other sites
Support
36 minutes ago, retslag1 said:

Was just curious how TG gets around the fact that wireguard requires IP logs to be kept? My understanding of this is rudimentary but this is what I've read. Sorry if this has been posted, I did a search and didn't see anything

 

No problem, we remove this info every 3 to 5 minutes when no handshake is detected.

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites
19807409
15 hours ago, Support said:

 

No problem, we remove this info every 3 to 5 minutes when no handshake is detected.

Regards

I actually asked in beta/development channel if you can publish more info on how you resolve some critical issues with wireguard, your solution seems to be the same from another provider which actually is ok but it fails to keep up with no log policy, I think it is important to make a note on that if that is the case, if that is not the case, I guess TG can explain what your solution does.

From my understanding of your reply, you do not delete those log files after 3-5 minutes, in fact, if you got logs for 3-5 minutes you already broke no log policy. I hope it is not stored in any file, instead it is in memory. The point of the question of thread starter is I believe to reply how do you make sure those are not logged.

Now your reply confuses me. Does TorGuard save separately logs somewhere where you delete them, or do you mean deleting from memory and never log it to a file? As if you just delete logs which actually is not required, then what happens with memory?

There is no way we user can audit it and I doubt you will intend to pay a company creating now one, this seems not reasonable to me at all and no matter how much I trust TG (which I do), thinking or believing is not knowing for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19807409

TorGuard always said that they first will apply it on their shared network, then on other ip's. We are actually exactly in that stage and I find it funny that we had few weeks of testing, before  TG enabled wireguard servers (with configs) so that users can test, after that, they applied it together with another solution dealing with privacy issues which go hand in hand with wireguard. On current point, if it would be on me, I would have extended beta testing, but I do think TG did nothing wrong in releasing it as so many people requested. You give a finger, people ask for your hand and that is what I am feeling right now (not really by this thread, but by those WG threads). There was quite a long period of testing phase and if you really want to port forward, then you can do so already now, as wireguard protocol let's you easily do it.

I expect it all to be first applied on all networks, including 10Gbit, if port forwarding comes together with it or not is in no way cruical, as if you use other protocols for doing it, I doubt you broke your system as TG still does not offer it.

If TG would not care about its users, they would have released it weeks ago, together with port forwarding and some bugs which a normal Joe user would unable to resolve and by that they would break their products.

I did test a lot wireguard and I started it when first wireguard servers were available. I also was asking TG about port forwarding back then and offered even a solution. TorGuard did not require my help at all in that question and we see now that they applied things which do work and can work and port forwarding works. Patience is the key, like stated previously, I would rather prefer TG to release official one after everything is tested as we clearly see that users come up today with questions like how to enable wireguard or if dedicated servers can be used, of course they can, just look up in your logs, analyse it a little bit, check the api of the server you connect to, such users do not care at all about privacy, just about their service which they paid for and are not interested in further details. I am glad that TG takes this seriously and instead to satisfy occasional customers, they care about them evevolving as a US based company which is not easy, especially taken in mind 5-eyes-warning. For me it is actually now much more important how exactly they deal with privacy issues connected to TorGuard and I see no users here testing it at all or questioning it, as that is the main reason for delay. Many claim, support prommised it to be weeks ago. Well, support is not development team and if development team told to support that wireguard system works, it is just matter of days, supported trusted it, but like in many soft dev projects, some issues came up, like people asking about privacy solution which in fact was probably not known to Support at the time when development successfully tested wireguard (not the system they  roll out).

Wireguard on TG works really, really good. Who wants, there are other VPN providers, they use same servers and some have wireguard too, some have even audit. By that, the choice for those who complain is given and I dont doubt that you will be able to use wireguard without requirement TG client, for me, I use actually only on 1 notebook TG client, everywhere else opencoonect and wireguard, where openconnect gives me significantly better results on upload, so, there is no hurry for me to move from openconnect as it still performs better than wireguard for quite many ISP's-Server combinations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Support
4 hours ago, 19807409 said:

I actually asked in beta/development channel if you can publish more info on how you resolve some critical issues with wireguard, your solution seems to be the same from another provider which actually is ok but it fails to keep up with no log policy, I think it is important to make a note on that if that is the case, if that is not the case, I guess TG can explain what your solution does.

From my understanding of your reply, you do not delete those log files after 3-5 minutes, in fact, if you got logs for 3-5 minutes you already broke no log policy. I hope it is not stored in any file, instead it is in memory. The point of the question of thread starter is I believe to reply how do you make sure those are not logged.

Now your reply confuses me. Does TorGuard save separately logs somewhere where you delete them, or do you mean deleting from memory and never log it to a file? As if you just delete logs which actually is not required, then what happens with memory?

There is no way we user can audit it and I doubt you will intend to pay a company creating now one, this seems not reasonable to me at all and no matter how much I trust TG (which I do), thinking or believing is not knowing for me.

 

We run mostly on RAM disks so nothing is ever stored on disk - wireguard needs to know the peers, this info is automatically removed.

Regards

  • Thanks 1
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
Reply to this topic...

×   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...