Jump to content
TorGuard
  • 0

Qbittorrent proxy problems

Rate this question


Royalight
 Share

Question

Hi, I am new to torguard and proxy for torrent as a whole. I followed the instructions on https://torguard.net/knowledgebase.php?action=displayarticle&id=241 with the settings as described and got no connection at all.

I switched to uTP and got the connection back. I am wondering if this will affect the proxy or even my speed. 
In addition, is there any settings I can tweak to increase the speed of my torrents?

Any help is appreciated, thank you in advance!

image.png.75054a498b68ec36728e300fcb8859cf.png

image.png.6ca8f1d2686138fbde14adef70c99aab.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
On 11/3/2020 at 10:46 AM, Royalight said:

Hi, I am new to torguard and proxy for torrent as a whole. I followed the instructions on https://torguard.net/knowledgebase.php?action=displayarticle&id=241 with the settings as described and got no connection at all.

I switched to uTP and got the connection back. I am wondering if this will affect the proxy or even my speed. 
In addition, is there any settings I can tweak to increase the speed of my torrents?

Any help is appreciated, thank you in advance!

image.png.75054a498b68ec36728e300fcb8859cf.png

image.png.6ca8f1d2686138fbde14adef70c99aab.png

Have you figured this out yet if so can you tell me what you fixed so o can fix my proxy speeds please 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Not sure this is same issue, on Ubuntu at least, qBittorrent does not work at all if network interface is not set to TorGuards VPN (or any VPN interface), under extended settings you can choose network interface, per default my LAN is choosen (enp7s0) and no matter if I set proxy/socks5/disabled qBittorrent does not work, to get it work, set it to the network interface of your VPN, in my case it is wireguard interface created by TorGuard client on my test pc, which is torguard-wg.

qBittorent in version 4 does not work at all for me if I use direct connection, it works only via VPN and this issue seems to be well known. However, no need to use v3 or switch to another client if you use VPN (in my case wireguard).

Using VPN, all torguard's socks and http servers work. Hope it helps some to resolve issues with qBittorrent and TorGuard.

Tested on Ubuntu 20.04 (Linux dev 5.4.0-54-generic #60-Ubuntu SMP Fri Nov 6 10:37:59 UTC 2020 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

Dump proxy and use vpn in qbittorent go to advanced make it only use torgards tap windows adapter in list then if vpn fails client cannot see internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, p7765f said:

Dump proxy and use vpn in qbittorent go to advanced make it only use torgards tap windows adapter in list then if vpn fails client cannot see internet.

for that one has to have vpn product
some have only proxy which they only bought for exactly this usage. If vpn is better or not or at all required is different from user to user, not all countries ban torrents and not every isp blocks or throttles torrent protocol

Better dump your spying windolls OS :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

When you get the 'could not resolve hostname' error, it means that the DNS server you are using (probably your ISP's) is not converting the hostname, i.e. proxy.torguard.io to an IP address. 

To get around this, you could either use one of the IP addresses instead from the SOCKS5 network page https://torguard.net/network/socks5/

Or change the IPv4 properties in the network adapter settings on your local Wifi or Ethernet connection to use Google's DNS servers.  Primary is 8.8.8.8 and secondary is 8.8.4.4

I changed my DNS settings on my computer to use Google's DNS server and then the hostname proxy.torguard.io resolved and I could use the proxy again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

I recommend using TorGuard DNS first foremost, otherwise: Cloudflare, OpenDNS and Adguard are good. I used to use Google myself, I think we all should try to be less dependant on Google services. Cloudflare is easy to remember just as the Google servers: 1.1.1.1, 1.0.0.1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 7/18/2021 at 2:54 PM, TorGuard said:

I recommend using TorGuard DNS first foremost, otherwise: Cloudflare, OpenDNS and Adguard are good. I used to use Google myself, I think we all should try to be less dependant on Google services. Cloudflare is easy to remember just as the Google servers: 1.1.1.1, 1.0.0.1.

I am curious, why recommend? With recommendation I might wrongly assume there is a reason for that argumentation, am I wrong? Every DNS has its own advantages and disadvantages, I personally tend to use cloudflare as it works best for me and my needs. I can not confirm, but on this forum I read somewhere that some services do not work with cloudflare sometimes, recommendation was OpenDNS in that case. As far as I remember, internal TorGuard's DNS is adfree (I might be wrong on that) and currently only 10.8.0.1 works 10.9.0.1 ??does not??. Adfree would be for me at least one of reasons why to recommend it but you did not mention it. What the difference would be in using fastest dns without adblocker but using brave browser with integrated blocker is a good question of habits, more than about TorGuards service. By that I guess my further thoughs about it would blow up this thread with offtopic, but I would be still curious if there is any other reasons for recommendation of using TorGuard's internal, I do use it on some devices but only because I've set it once for a test and do not bother changing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
13 hours ago, 19807409 said:

I am curious, why recommend? With recommendation I might wrongly assume there is a reason for that argumentation, am I wrong? Every DNS has its own advantages and disadvantages, I personally tend to use cloudflare as it works best for me and my needs. I can not confirm, but on this forum I read somewhere that some services do not work with cloudflare sometimes, recommendation was OpenDNS in that case. As far as I remember, internal TorGuard's DNS is adfree (I might be wrong on that) and currently only 10.8.0.1 works 10.9.0.1 ??does not??. Adfree would be for me at least one of reasons why to recommend it but you did not mention it. What the difference would be in using fastest dns without adblocker but using brave browser with integrated blocker is a good question of habits, more than about TorGuards service. By that I guess my further thoughs about it would blow up this thread with offtopic, but I would be still curious if there is any other reasons for recommendation of using TorGuard's internal, I do use it on some devices but only because I've set it once for a test and do not bother changing them.

 

Anything is better than using Google, my recommendation was primarily in response to the previous comment recommending to use Google which is not good if you care about privacy. Use whatever you want, I like TorGuard DNS because it keeps all your traffic inclusive within the VPN service. There is nothing wrong with using TorGuard DNS servers, unless you know something that states otherwise. TorGuard has two DNS server types, one with adblock and the other without.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
10 hours ago, TorGuard said:

Anything is better than using Google, my recommendation was primarily in response to the previous comment recommending to use Google which is not good if you care about privacy

You can not imagine any use case where TorGuard customer would actually want or need google dns? I never put in question advantages or disadvantages of different DNS servers, I also think that it is a fact that many do use google servers which one can not ignore, of course, we are talking again mostly about habbits of different users and theri knowledge where many do know and remember it quickly. Cloudflare is even easier with one.one.one.one but cloudflare offers dns service since much shorter time than google.

I agree that there are better and faster dns servers, depending on where a user is. This is exactly why I asked, I did not think you would feel attacked by simple question of why recommendation for internal server. I also did not mean one should not use and I might have, as we can see wrongly, expected some further explanation about torguard's dns.

10 hours ago, TorGuard said:

Use whatever you want, I like TorGuard DNS because it keeps all your traffic inclusive within the VPN service.

I do use whatever I want ;) . Centralization has its disadvantages too, running all traffic over TorGuard can be judged differently by different users, knowing that TorGuard is US based it is different from user to user if they want it, I would dislike if there wouldn't be internal dns which is required for some other things.

10 hours ago, TorGuard said:

There is nothing wrong with using TorGuard DNS servers, unless you know something that states otherwise. TorGuard has two DNS server types, one with adblock and the other without.

I never claimed something is wrong, where as we say it, there was some maintenance and I was not aware if 10.9.0.1 works, and I also only assumed that 10.8.0.1 is adblock. However, by asking if I know more, well, for myself I do indeed. As you recommend internal TorGuard's, here is some info with 

dnseval --dnssec -t A --color -f public-servers.txt -c10 ripe.net
server              avg(ms)     min(ms)     max(ms)     stddev(ms)  lost(%)  ttl        flags                  response
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.8.0.1            34.366      30.712      39.118      2.247       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
10.9.0.1            46.467      41.034      52.489      4.002       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
1.0.0.1             57.857      54.932      63.121      2.764       %0       80         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
1.1.1.1             49.659      31.727      62.404      12.606      %0       79         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
195.46.39.39        32.332      30.909      35.172      1.308       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
195.46.39.40        32.355      30.334      35.300      1.583       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
208.67.220.220      36.693      30.932      47.117      4.426       %0       82         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
208.67.222.222      43.315      41.786      47.171      1.746       %0       189        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
216.146.35.35       53.134      46.731      57.246      3.547       %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
216.146.36.36       52.220      36.888      59.131      7.400       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
209.244.0.3         39.105      32.837      63.442      9.717       %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
209.244.0.4         43.899      32.907      107.637     22.546      %0       52         QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.1             45.330      42.119      49.484      2.456       %0       52         QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.2             58.738      53.182      61.228      2.460       %0       298        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.3             54.220      36.304      60.994      8.465       %0       298        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.4             30.553      26.943      33.153      1.864       %0       50         QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.5             33.619      29.961      35.239      1.713       %0       297        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
80.80.80.80         59.464      38.992      187.875     45.540      %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
80.80.81.81         74.469      54.132      207.709     46.922      %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
8.8.4.4             49.712      35.034      65.931      10.861      %0       35         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
8.8.8.8             37.126      31.640      47.935      5.297       %0       35         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
9.9.9.9             35.606      32.650      45.389      3.608       %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
149.112.112.112     46.638      33.905      55.454      7.501       %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
64.6.64.6           53.363      50.349      59.111      2.627       %0       107        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
64.6.65.6           46.644      30.267      59.421      11.079      %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
8.26.56.26          36.279      31.086      44.314      4.840       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
8.20.247.20         37.454      32.332      45.297      4.290       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR

 

with tls (only cloudflare, google and quad work):

dnseval --dnssec -t A --tls --color -f public-servers.txt -c10 ripe.net
server              avg(ms)     min(ms)     max(ms)     stddev(ms)  lost(%)  ttl        flags                  response
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.8.0.1            0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
10.9.0.1            0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
1.0.0.1             155.279     147.358     170.329     7.124       %0       296        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
1.1.1.1             187.067     146.294     236.867     36.326      %0       293        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
195.46.39.39        0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
195.46.39.40        0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
208.67.220.220      0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
208.67.222.222      0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
216.146.35.35       0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
216.146.36.36       0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
209.244.0.3         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
209.244.0.4         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.1             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.2             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.3             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.4             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.5             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
80.80.80.80         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
80.80.81.81         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
8.8.4.4             156.590     148.789     160.377     3.887       %0       38         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
8.8.8.8             232.399     151.226     301.678     50.121      %0       147        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
9.9.9.9             286.715     139.805     592.759     149.181     %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
149.112.112.112     153.409     135.862     182.502     16.598      %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
64.6.64.6           0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
64.6.65.6           0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
8.26.56.26          0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
8.20.247.20         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response

Doing some more extended test and checking what namebench_2021-07-21_0219.html says (see attachment), namebench suggestion is following:

Primary Server	
127.0.0.53
SYS-127.0.0.53
Secondary Server	
141.1.1.1
Cable & Wireless DE-3
Tertiary Server	
193.67.79.39
UU EU200 NL

 

HTML result:

namebench 1.3.1

Your current primary DNS server is

Fastest

 

Recommended configuration (fastest + nearest)

Primary Server
127.0.0.53
SYS-127.0.0.53
Secondary Server
141.1.1.1
Cable & Wireless DE-3
Tertiary Server
193.67.79.39
UU EU200 NL

Tested DNS Servers

IP Descr. Hostname Avg (ms) Diff Min Max TO NX Notes
127.0.0.53 SYS-127.0.0.53 localhost 69.31   0.4 579.9 0 13
208.67.220.220 OpenDNS resolver2.opendns.com 75.45 -8.1% 31.7 456.6 2 14
8.8.8.8 Google Public DNS dns.google 78.70 -11.9% 30.1 709.6 0 13
216.146.36.36 DynGuide-2 rdns.dynect.net 111.11 -37.6% 30.0 2695.9 0 13
156.154.71.1 UltraDNS-2 rdns2.ultradns.net 142.06 -51.2% 32.0 3500.0 6 13
10.9.0.1 10.9.0.1 10.9.0.1 148.37 -53.3% 29.7 3500.0 1 13
141.1.1.1 Cable & Wireless DE-3 cns1.cw.net 545.67       0  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.
193.67.79.39 UU EU200 NL cache0200.ns.eu.uu.net 546.26       0  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.
209.244.0.3 Level3-R1 resolver1.level3.net 580.87       1  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.
4.2.2.3 Level 3/GTEI-3 c.resolvers.level3.net 622.37       0  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.
1.1.1.1 1.1.1.1 one.one.one.one 1321.93   36.8   0  
  • Shares-cache with current primary DNS server
10.8.0.1 10.8.0.1 10.8.0.1 1333.57   33.6   0  
  • Slower replica of 10.9.0.1 [10.9.0.1]
1.0.0.1 1.0.0.1 one.one.one.one 1335.47   32.5   0  
  • Slower replica of OpenDNS [208.67.220.220]
199.2.252.10 Sprintlink-2 ns2.sprintlink.net 1584.92       1  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.

Graphs

Mean Response Duration

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chxt=y%2Cx%2Cx&chd=e%3AdkgMhlvZ8m.T&chxp=0%7C2%2C66&chxr=1%2C0%2C150%7C2%2C-7.5%2C157.5&chxtc=1%2C-720&chco=0000ff&chbh=a&chs=720x130&cht=bhg&chxl=0%3A%7C10.9.0.1%7CUltraDNS-2%7CDynGuide-2%7CGoogle%20Public%20DNS%7COpenDNS%7CSYS-127.0.0.53%7C1%3A%7C0%7C10%7C20%7C30%7C40%7C50%7C60%7C70%7C80%7C90%7C100%7C110%7C120%7C130%7C140%7C150%7C2%3A%7CDuration%20in%20ms.

Fastest Individual Response Duration

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chxt=y%2Cx%2Cx&chd=e%3AAu2V27295.6h&chxp=0%7C2%2C15&chxr=1%2C0%2C35%7C2%2C-1.75%2C36.75&chxtc=1%2C-720&chco=0000ff&chbh=a&chs=720x130&cht=bhg&chxl=0%3A%7CUltraDNS-2%7COpenDNS%7CGoogle%20Public%20DNS%7CDynGuide-2%7C10.9.0.1%7CSYS-127.0.0.53%7C1%3A%7C0%7C3%7C6%7C9%7C12%7C15%7C18%7C21%7C24%7C27%7C30%7C33%7C35%7C2%3A%7CDuration%20in%20ms.

Response Distribution Chart (First 200ms)

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=lxy&chs=720x415&chxt=x,y&chg=10,20&chxr=0,0,200%7C1,0,100&chd=t:0,0,1,17,18,19,20,23,24,26,26,28,29,31,33,36,41,54,62,99,135%7C0,0,12,20,27,32,35,39,44,48,54,60,65,69,74,77,82,85,90,93,97%7C0,15,16,18,20,22,23,26,28,30,32,34,37,40,53,64,70,76,85,90,98,105%7C0,0,6,10,14,19,23,27,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,59,63,66,70,74,78,82%7C0,15,16,19,20,21,22,24,25,27,28,30,31,34,35,38,40,47,52,61,68,79,96,106%7C0,0,6,10,15,20,24,28,32,36,42,47,52,57,60,64,68,71,75,78,82,86,89,93%7C0,15,19,21,23,23,24,25,26,28,28,30,31,32,34,35,35,37,38,41,44,66,110%7C0,0,4,10,14,19,25,30,34,40,43,48,52,56,61,65,69,73,80,85,88,92,96%7C0,16,17,18,19,20,21,23,24,25,26,26,28,28,30,32,32,34,38,43,56,65,84,122%7C0,0,7,12,16,22,27,31,36,40,44,48,52,56,61,66,69,73,77,82,86,89,93,96%7C0,16,17,19,21,24,25,26,28,29,31,32,35,36,38,41,46,52,65,73,77,97,113%7C0,0,4,9,15,20,24,33,38,43,48,52,56,61,65,69,73,76,80,84,87,91,94&chco=ff9900,1a00ff,ff00e6,80ff00,00e6ff,fae30a&chxt=x,y,x,y&chxl=2:%7C%7CDuration+in+ms%7C%7C3:%7C%7C%25%7C&chdl=SYS-127.0.0.53%7C10.9.0.1%7CDynGuide-2%7CGoogle+Public+DNS%7COpenDNS%7CUltraDNS-2

Response Distribution Chart (Full)

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=lxy&chs=720x415&chxt=x,y&chg=10,20&chxr=0,0,3500%7C1,0,100&chd=t:0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,4,6,8,17%7C0,0,12,20,27,32,35,39,44,48,54,60,65,69,74,77,82,85,90,93,97,100%7C0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,4,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,8,9,11,100%7C0,0,6,10,14,19,23,27,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,59,63,66,70,74,78,82,86,89,93,96,100%7C0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,5,5,6,9,77%7C0,0,6,10,15,20,24,28,32,36,42,47,52,57,60,64,68,71,75,78,82,86,89,93,96,100%7C0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,4,6,14,20%7C0,0,4,10,14,19,25,30,34,40,43,48,52,56,61,65,69,73,80,85,88,92,96,99,100%7C0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,4,5,7,13%7C0,0,7,12,16,22,27,31,36,40,44,48,52,56,61,66,69,73,77,82,86,89,93,96,100%7C0,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,3,4,4,4,6,6,11,100%7C0,0,4,9,15,20,24,33,38,43,48,52,56,61,65,69,73,76,80,84,87,91,94,98,100&chco=ff9900,1a00ff,ff00e6,80ff00,00e6ff,fae30a&chxt=x,y,x,y&chxl=2:%7C%7CDuration+in+ms%7C%7C3:%7C%7C%25%7C&chdl=SYS-127.0.0.53%7C10.9.0.1%7CDynGuide-2%7CGoogle+Public+DNS%7COpenDNS%7CUltraDNS-2

Query Details

View the details in Comma Separated Values (csv) format.

Configuration

Name Value
benchmark_thread_count 2
enable_censorship_checks 1
health_thread_count 40
health_timeout 3.75
hide_results 0
input_source firefox
num_servers 11
ping_timeout 0.5
query_count 250
run_count 1
select_mode automatic
template html
timeout 3.5
upload_results 1
version 1.3.1

 

We clearly can see that TorGuard DNS performs well and this is confirmation once again that I never claimed it works, however, I did those benchmarks just quickly now as we got into discussion why should one use TorGuard's internal DNS, not why one should not use google's. Namebench is also for few things outdated and this is one of reasons why I asked if there is some known reasons for recommendation as I expected that there is maybe some better overview with more extended tests of TorGuard's servers, hope my benchmarks clarify what I actually was asking for :) , sorry for long post

 

namebench_2021-07-21_0219.csv namebench_2021-07-21_0219.js namebench_2021-07-21_0219.html.zip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
On 7/20/2021 at 8:50 PM, 19807409 said:

You can not imagine any use case where TorGuard customer would actually want or need google dns? I never put in question advantages or disadvantages of different DNS servers, I also think that it is a fact that many do use google servers which one can not ignore, of course, we are talking again mostly about habbits of different users and theri knowledge where many do know and remember it quickly. Cloudflare is even easier with one.one.one.one but cloudflare offers dns service since much shorter time than google.

I agree that there are better and faster dns servers, depending on where a user is. This is exactly why I asked, I did not think you would feel attacked by simple question of why recommendation for internal server. I also did not mean one should not use and I might have, as we can see wrongly, expected some further explanation about torguard's dns.

I do use whatever I want ;) . Centralization has its disadvantages too, running all traffic over TorGuard can be judged differently by different users, knowing that TorGuard is US based it is different from user to user if they want it, I would dislike if there wouldn't be internal dns which is required for some other things.

I never claimed something is wrong, where as we say it, there was some maintenance and I was not aware if 10.9.0.1 works, and I also only assumed that 10.8.0.1 is adblock. However, by asking if I know more, well, for myself I do indeed. As you recommend internal TorGuard's, here is some info with 

dnseval --dnssec -t A --color -f public-servers.txt -c10 ripe.net
server              avg(ms)     min(ms)     max(ms)     stddev(ms)  lost(%)  ttl        flags                  response
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.8.0.1            34.366      30.712      39.118      2.247       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
10.9.0.1            46.467      41.034      52.489      4.002       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
1.0.0.1             57.857      54.932      63.121      2.764       %0       80         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
1.1.1.1             49.659      31.727      62.404      12.606      %0       79         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
195.46.39.39        32.332      30.909      35.172      1.308       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
195.46.39.40        32.355      30.334      35.300      1.583       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
208.67.220.220      36.693      30.932      47.117      4.426       %0       82         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
208.67.222.222      43.315      41.786      47.171      1.746       %0       189        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
216.146.35.35       53.134      46.731      57.246      3.547       %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
216.146.36.36       52.220      36.888      59.131      7.400       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
209.244.0.3         39.105      32.837      63.442      9.717       %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
209.244.0.4         43.899      32.907      107.637     22.546      %0       52         QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.1             45.330      42.119      49.484      2.456       %0       52         QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.2             58.738      53.182      61.228      2.460       %0       298        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.3             54.220      36.304      60.994      8.465       %0       298        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.4             30.553      26.943      33.153      1.864       %0       50         QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
4.2.2.5             33.619      29.961      35.239      1.713       %0       297        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
80.80.80.80         59.464      38.992      187.875     45.540      %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
80.80.81.81         74.469      54.132      207.709     46.922      %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
8.8.4.4             49.712      35.034      65.931      10.861      %0       35         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
8.8.8.8             37.126      31.640      47.935      5.297       %0       35         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
9.9.9.9             35.606      32.650      45.389      3.608       %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
149.112.112.112     46.638      33.905      55.454      7.501       %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
64.6.64.6           53.363      50.349      59.111      2.627       %0       107        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
64.6.65.6           46.644      30.267      59.421      11.079      %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA -- --   NOERROR             
8.26.56.26          36.279      31.086      44.314      4.840       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
8.20.247.20         37.454      32.332      45.297      4.290       %0       299        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR

 

with tls (only cloudflare, google and quad work):

dnseval --dnssec -t A --tls --color -f public-servers.txt -c10 ripe.net
server              avg(ms)     min(ms)     max(ms)     stddev(ms)  lost(%)  ttl        flags                  response
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10.8.0.1            0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
10.9.0.1            0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
1.0.0.1             155.279     147.358     170.329     7.124       %0       296        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
1.1.1.1             187.067     146.294     236.867     36.326      %0       293        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
195.46.39.39        0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
195.46.39.40        0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
208.67.220.220      0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
208.67.222.222      0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
216.146.35.35       0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
216.146.36.36       0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
209.244.0.3         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
209.244.0.4         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.1             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.2             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.3             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.4             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
4.2.2.5             0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
80.80.80.80         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
80.80.81.81         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
8.8.4.4             156.590     148.789     160.377     3.887       %0       38         QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
8.8.8.8             232.399     151.226     301.678     50.121      %0       147        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
9.9.9.9             286.715     139.805     592.759     149.181     %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
149.112.112.112     153.409     135.862     182.502     16.598      %0       300        QR -- -- RD RA AD --   NOERROR             
64.6.64.6           0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
64.6.65.6           0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
8.26.56.26          0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response         
8.20.247.20         0.000       0.000       0.000       0.000       %100     N/A        -- -- -- -- -- -- --   No Response

Doing some more extended test and checking what namebench_2021-07-21_0219.html says (see attachment), namebench suggestion is following:

Primary Server	
127.0.0.53
SYS-127.0.0.53
Secondary Server	
141.1.1.1
Cable & Wireless DE-3
Tertiary Server	
193.67.79.39
UU EU200 NL

 

HTML result:

namebench 1.3.1

Your current primary DNS server is

Fastest

 

Recommended configuration (fastest + nearest)

Primary Server
127.0.0.53
SYS-127.0.0.53
Secondary Server
141.1.1.1
Cable & Wireless DE-3
Tertiary Server
193.67.79.39
UU EU200 NL

Tested DNS Servers

IP Descr. Hostname Avg (ms) Diff Min Max TO NX Notes
127.0.0.53 SYS-127.0.0.53 localhost 69.31   0.4 579.9 0 13
208.67.220.220 OpenDNS resolver2.opendns.com 75.45 -8.1% 31.7 456.6 2 14
8.8.8.8 Google Public DNS dns.google 78.70 -11.9% 30.1 709.6 0 13
216.146.36.36 DynGuide-2 rdns.dynect.net 111.11 -37.6% 30.0 2695.9 0 13
156.154.71.1 UltraDNS-2 rdns2.ultradns.net 142.06 -51.2% 32.0 3500.0 6 13
10.9.0.1 10.9.0.1 10.9.0.1 148.37 -53.3% 29.7 3500.0 1 13
141.1.1.1 Cable & Wireless DE-3 cns1.cw.net 545.67       0  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.
193.67.79.39 UU EU200 NL cache0200.ns.eu.uu.net 546.26       0  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.
209.244.0.3 Level3-R1 resolver1.level3.net 580.87       1  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.
4.2.2.3 Level 3/GTEI-3 c.resolvers.level3.net 622.37       0  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.
1.1.1.1 1.1.1.1 one.one.one.one 1321.93   36.8   0  
  • Shares-cache with current primary DNS server
10.8.0.1 10.8.0.1 10.8.0.1 1333.57   33.6   0  
  • Slower replica of 10.9.0.1 [10.9.0.1]
1.0.0.1 1.0.0.1 one.one.one.one 1335.47   32.5   0  
  • Slower replica of OpenDNS [208.67.220.220]
199.2.252.10 Sprintlink-2 ns2.sprintlink.net 1584.92       1  
  • Too many warnings (7), probably broken.

Graphs

Mean Response Duration

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chxt=y%2Cx%2Cx&chd=e%3AdkgMhlvZ8m.T&chxp=0|2%2C66&chxr=1%2C0%2C150|2%2C-7.5%2C157.5&chxtc=1%2C-720&chco=0000ff&chbh=a&chs=720x130&cht=bhg&chxl=0%3A|10.9.0.1|UltraDNS-2|DynGuide-2|Google Public DNS|OpenDNS|SYS-127.0.0.53|1%3A|0|10|20|30|40|50|60|70|80|90|100|110|120|130|140|150|2%3A|Duration in ms.

Fastest Individual Response Duration

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?chxt=y%2Cx%2Cx&chd=e%3AAu2V27295.6h&chxp=0|2%2C15&chxr=1%2C0%2C35|2%2C-1.75%2C36.75&chxtc=1%2C-720&chco=0000ff&chbh=a&chs=720x130&cht=bhg&chxl=0%3A|UltraDNS-2|OpenDNS|Google Public DNS|DynGuide-2|10.9.0.1|SYS-127.0.0.53|1%3A|0|3|6|9|12|15|18|21|24|27|30|33|35|2%3A|Duration in ms.

Response Distribution Chart (First 200ms)

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=lxy&chs=720x415&chxt=x,y&chg=10,20&chxr=0,0,200|1,0,100&chd=t:0,0,1,17,18,19,20,23,24,26,26,28,29,31,33,36,41,54,62,99,135|0,0,12,20,27,32,35,39,44,48,54,60,65,69,74,77,82,85,90,93,97|0,15,16,18,20,22,23,26,28,30,32,34,37,40,53,64,70,76,85,90,98,105|0,0,6,10,14,19,23,27,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,59,63,66,70,74,78,82|0,15,16,19,20,21,22,24,25,27,28,30,31,34,35,38,40,47,52,61,68,79,96,106|0,0,6,10,15,20,24,28,32,36,42,47,52,57,60,64,68,71,75,78,82,86,89,93|0,15,19,21,23,23,24,25,26,28,28,30,31,32,34,35,35,37,38,41,44,66,110|0,0,4,10,14,19,25,30,34,40,43,48,52,56,61,65,69,73,80,85,88,92,96|0,16,17,18,19,20,21,23,24,25,26,26,28,28,30,32,32,34,38,43,56,65,84,122|0,0,7,12,16,22,27,31,36,40,44,48,52,56,61,66,69,73,77,82,86,89,93,96|0,16,17,19,21,24,25,26,28,29,31,32,35,36,38,41,46,52,65,73,77,97,113|0,0,4,9,15,20,24,33,38,43,48,52,56,61,65,69,73,76,80,84,87,91,94&chco=ff9900,1a00ff,ff00e6,80ff00,00e6ff,fae30a&chxt=x,y,x,y&chxl=2:||Duration+in+ms||3:||%|&chdl=SYS-127.0.0.53|10.9.0.1|DynGuide-2|Google+Public+DNS|OpenDNS|UltraDNS-2

Response Distribution Chart (Full)

http://chart.apis.google.com/chart?cht=lxy&chs=720x415&chxt=x,y&chg=10,20&chxr=0,0,3500|1,0,100&chd=t:0,0,0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,4,6,8,17|0,0,12,20,27,32,35,39,44,48,54,60,65,69,74,77,82,85,90,93,97,100|0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,4,4,4,5,5,6,6,7,8,9,11,100|0,0,6,10,14,19,23,27,32,36,40,44,48,52,56,59,63,66,70,74,78,82,86,89,93,96,100|0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,4,5,5,6,9,77|0,0,6,10,15,20,24,28,32,36,42,47,52,57,60,64,68,71,75,78,82,86,89,93,96,100|0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,4,6,14,20|0,0,4,10,14,19,25,30,34,40,43,48,52,56,61,65,69,73,80,85,88,92,96,99,100|0,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,4,5,7,13|0,0,7,12,16,22,27,31,36,40,44,48,52,56,61,66,69,73,77,82,86,89,93,96,100|0,1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,3,3,4,4,4,6,6,11,100|0,0,4,9,15,20,24,33,38,43,48,52,56,61,65,69,73,76,80,84,87,91,94,98,100&chco=ff9900,1a00ff,ff00e6,80ff00,00e6ff,fae30a&chxt=x,y,x,y&chxl=2:||Duration+in+ms||3:||%|&chdl=SYS-127.0.0.53|10.9.0.1|DynGuide-2|Google+Public+DNS|OpenDNS|UltraDNS-2

Query Details

View the details in Comma Separated Values (csv) format.

Configuration

Name Value
benchmark_thread_count 2
enable_censorship_checks 1
health_thread_count 40
health_timeout 3.75
hide_results 0
input_source firefox
num_servers 11
ping_timeout 0.5
query_count 250
run_count 1
select_mode automatic
template html
timeout 3.5
upload_results 1
version 1.3.1

 

We clearly can see that TorGuard DNS performs well and this is confirmation once again that I never claimed it works, however, I did those benchmarks just quickly now as we got into discussion why should one use TorGuard's internal DNS, not why one should not use google's. Namebench is also for few things outdated and this is one of reasons why I asked if there is some known reasons for recommendation as I expected that there is maybe some better overview with more extended tests of TorGuard's servers, hope my benchmarks clarify what I actually was asking for :) , sorry for long post

 

namebench_2021-07-21_0219.csvUnavailable namebench_2021-07-21_0219.jsUnavailable namebench_2021-07-21_0219.html.zipUnavailable

 

Hello, sorry for delayed response if you were expecting one. Interesting to see the TorGuard DNS servers are faster in most cases, for me personally trusting your DNS server is more important than speed. I trust TorGuard and while I don't know the in's and out's of how their DNS servers work, they work good for me and I recommend others to use if you have a VPN service with them. Using Google is fine for stuff you don't care about, although it's good practice to avoid anything Google all together. To clarify about the DNS servers, there is two internal DNS server types and there is also a static pair of DNS servers that can be found in the client area under the "DNS Info" tab:

 

Internal VPN Adblock DNS: 10.26.0.1

Internal VPN Standard DNS: 10.9.0.1, 10.8.0.1

Standard DNS: US based servers, won't be ideal if you're far away.

 

As for giving you reasons for recommending TorGuard, I've already given you the reason, if you want detailed explaination of how TorGuard DNS servers work and what are the benefits of using them your best bet is to talk to TorGuard with that one as they can give you the best possible answers related to their own network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

stop whining and deflecting troll, you are a retard, you do not have to be ashamed for that, just visit your doc and do not forget to take your pills. I do not need to comment on your further idiotic responses, I do not read them, you insult other people, idiot, then you cry when you get the same, some pathetic retarded liers like you cant take it when their idiocricy is exposed, just like in your case, nobody forced you to reply nonsense proving what an idiot you are claiming afterwards somebody hurted you, you fly high, it hurts falling down, your whining will not change a fact that you are an idiot. Best is your claim that you follow my conversations :), oh, you are my fan, how neety of you, but go seek for attention elsewhere, you just dig it it deeper for yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0
1 hour ago, 19807409 said:

stop whining and deflecting troll, you are a retard, you do not have to be ashamed for that, just visit your doc and do not forget to take your pills. I do not need to comment on your further idiotic responses, I do not read them, you insult other people, idiot, then you cry when you get the same, some pathetic retarded liers like you cant take it when their idiocricy is exposed, just like in your case, nobody forced you to reply nonsense proving what an idiot you are claiming afterwards somebody hurted you, you fly high, it hurts falling down, your whining will not change a fact that you are an idiot. Best is your claim that you follow my conversations :), oh, you are my fan, how neety of you, but go seek for attention elsewhere, you just dig it it deeper for yourself.

 

You haven't exposed anything, everything you apparently "exposed" hasn't been backed up besides using personal attacks because you can't back it up what you said. I'd be surprised you don't get banned from here. Arrogance is a bliss, I'm not the one deflecting here.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 0

you first can not explain anything about dns, then you contradict yourself and you claim on your own not to have any clue but force this discussion upon yourself, now you whine again like a little girl wanting me to explain you things, but you refused to read and those things were explained and for no reason you were riding your high horse, your mind must be blowing up as argumentation is not your strongest side,

giphy.gif

also posing as TorGuard does not help, you might have tried 50cent or something, but then you would still end up as 5 cent after first check :), go go, push yourself ;) or chill, the later seems better for you.

As for impression, you clearly left one

giphy.gif

Once you stop whining about the result of your behaviour, you might start calling me a sir, I will still ignore you until you start reading, and first thinking then posting online, keep that in mind please.

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -1
On 7/23/2021 at 8:29 PM, TorGuard said:

Hello, sorry for delayed response if you were expecting one.

Hello, dont worry, I did not expect any within few minutes, if you want me to be honest, I hoped to get one at some point. However, it is better if people have time to think before they reply ;).

On 7/23/2021 at 8:29 PM, TorGuard said:

o clarify about the DNS servers, there is two internal DNS server types and there is also a static pair of DNS servers that can be found in the client area under the "DNS Info" tab:

 

Internal VPN Adblock DNS: 10.26.0.1

Internal VPN Standard DNS: 10.9.0.1, 10.8.0.1

Thanks for clarification, I do not use internal adblock and barely use standard one, I remember there were listed in torguard client but did not know if any changes happend to due to the fact that torguard had to apply some global changes due to wireguard implementation and I wasn't sure I remember it well, thanks again for clarification.

On 7/23/2021 at 8:29 PM, TorGuard said:

for me personally trusting your DNS server is more important than speed. I trust TorGuard and while I don't know the in's and out's of how their DNS servers work, they work good for me and I recommend others to use if you have a VPN service with them

There are two sentences and you contradict yourself in both. In first you say that for you personally as important:

1.1. Trust

1.2. Performance irrelevant

In second sentence you sey that you trust TorGuard while you do not know the in and out's of how their DNS servers work.

2.1. In second part of second sentence you point out:

2.2. It works for you.

I really do not want to understand me wrong, it is nothing wrong on helping users with recommendations and your's is for sure better than simply not telling a user google's dns should not be used. But according to your own explanation, you do not know it meaning that if user really asks why he shouldnt use it, me at least, I wouldnt be convinced by your argumentation and here is why:

1. Trust is not privacy as well as not security. What does trusting your DNS mean?

2. Without to define what trust is which is most important for you, you claim that performance is irrelevant. Well, here you have a problem with that argumentation which would be simply that you actually claim all things that can be tested, validated, audited and verified are not important for you, but undefined trust which can not be measured nor validated, audited or verified, such argumentation simply shuts down whole discussion and can not be serious.

3. You contradict yourself within few words, whatever was meant by trust, be it security or privacy or whatever, you claim not to know in and out's. How is then your trust built and based on actually what? This confirms my point 2. above.

4. As last you base your recommendation based on your customer experience in a way that it worked for you in a way that you never had any issues. It is great share of experience when you write it clearly.

On 7/23/2021 at 8:29 PM, TorGuard said:

Using Google is fine for stuff you don't care about, although it's good practice to avoid anything Google all together.

Why is it not good practice and practice for what? I ask this specifically as I do guess your reply would be security, but guess what, most people do not have any issues to be spied on and you can start with EU's highest political ranks, it also does not matter to people that snowdens words reached mainstream, few people might care more, however, you have quite a lot people using google products, one of such is their android which is has biggest market share, by that, quite a lot people do use not only google OS but google drive, documents, maps and much, much more, which in fact is their whole live, google does not need at all your dns requests if they have your whole life already cataloged, this is exactly how most people think.

To add few more words about it, to show you that you can be example, but you can not change ignorants. Imagine, few people sent requests to some manufactures to produce open source OS or at least to strip all OS unrequired apps which are preinstalled and waste space/ram/cpu/battery/... . There was simply never a reply to such requests or you were explained that it is not in any plans to do so. In the meantime google has monopoly and was used as soft warfare against China. The result is Google services are not available for companies which US sanctions, lets take most famous as example which is Huawei. This resulted in Huawei indeed bringing on market phones without google services and support for it. The world was over for many Huawei lowers :) , but if you think, for who is it a problem? Is it a problem if there is no Google Play if there is App Gallery providing quite all the same apps? No, the real problem is the dependency on google services, like photos which got uploaded for years to google in original size as google claimed they will not count as used space, then suddenly switching it off, resulting in big percentage of their users running out of space which lead to other problems like not getting emails as your storage is full due to pics. So, the easiest what most could and probaby did do is to optimize their pics in settings, resulting actually in getting rid of your originals and keeping only non origianl size reduced images. In short, people lost their pics due to such bad management and planning which happened. Meaning, if there is a phone on a market which has no google services but you still must have android or ios, then I personally would always take current huawei phones without google services.

The story above should actually prove that people do not care. Another history is how cheap currently those Huawei's without google support are, starting with light models to p40pro and mate, there is no comparable hardware for that price and then a wonder happened, best price/overall phones are shipped without Google services, now finally those who listen to you can get really rid of google. I do not know where you live, but if you visit EU, then go to one of major shops and ask how the sale of huawei phones is going on? They will tell you: Most people return phone back because they claim they cant install anything, there are no applications for it because google does not work.

If people would care about security and privacy, those huawei's would be sold out before they even were produced. The reality is they are no and those security and privacy things is just a big marketing gag, taken in mind os's which are offered gov's for ability to spy on many ways makes everybody to easy object no matter where you are and if hide your DNS, IP or anything else. This post gets very long, I have to shorten it and will let you build up own opinion about written above, but to point, is there anything else which is important for a normal Joe user who cant benchmark and analyze DNS's? Of course there is, here is one important thing which today many ISP's practice:

- Not providing 100% bandwidth, only providing it on request to speedtest servers for the case that users always gets top results when doing speedtest.
 

In point above it is in fact 100% about money saving for a normal joe, especially for those paying $ X0+ monthly. In general, changing DNS will not help for every provider, however, proper VPN (TorGuards is Premium, not proper) should resolve this issue too considered your vpn provider indeed offers stable high speed connections (which in fact from very many years of experience only my own servers and TorGuard provided it, no other vpn provider could satisfy my simple :) needs).

As you see, whatever you have defined as "Trust", for normal Joe there are much more important things, like to save money on ISP for not paying and getting few percent of 100. In this case, normal Joe does indeed remember or asks a colleague from work (like an admin) what he should do and I guess in 8 of 10 answers 8.8.8.8 will be said, user will try it and it will work. This is something that you should not ignore and google is technically most advanced from all and could in theory offer decent services, it is completly another story that they simply eradicated big bunch of their paying customers with their political agendas, however, I bet they made profit in politic business, but all of it was short-minded, now we got a phone without their services and there are different providers offering same/better services than google, like I said, yandex covers biggest part for those who need much cheaper storage, decent but simple security as well as unlimited for pictures and videos, which again is money saver for normal joe, but hey, normal Joe never read about yandex :) , mega and other decent services including ability to actually rent own 10Gbit servers.

As you see, discussion about it all can get long, I hope you do not missunderstand me in any way, I just wanted to share my own experience, you can take it or leave ;), hope you got no offense on my critical take of your reply.

Torguard support is indeed decent and I was not interested in bugging admins with questions about dns which I barely use, I did assume you maybe already could have asked, but this is a good point for @Supportto think what exactly they can write about their DNS servers and like you, I doubt users on this forum need that technical information at all, those who need it, they anyway ask it as step one before paying for a product, maybe exploring new ways for marketing and finance some rap battle explaining everybody why TorGuard is so good B)

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -1

You really expect anyone to read or respond to everything you just wrote (I stopped at your third multi-quote fyi)? My response was kept simple and to be informational to others. For the record, I know some of the things I wrote are flawed and not clear, I tried to edit my message few hours after I posted it but the site does not allow you to do so. I even reported my own message to have it deleted or manually edited but the staff on the forum are not active so here we are now. I saved my revised response, which is mainly put in a simple format to help others instead of this back and forth non-sense that you're doing now over someones opinion and recommendation.

 

Here is the revisement, I put this exactly in the report (staff can confirm) and did not change anything after your recent response. I suggest you move on and find something better to do with your time, as I'm not going to waste mine any longer with you and your false assumptions/facts.

 

 

Hello, sorry for delayed response if you were expecting one. Interesting to see the TorGuard DNS servers are faster in most cases, for me personally trusting your DNS server is more important than speed. I trust TorGuard and while I don't know the in's and out's of how their DNS servers work, they work good for me and I recommend others to use if you have a VPN service with TorGuard (would you trust Google who is known to collect data on users or would you trust a privacy service you pay for that offers DNS servers). It's good practice to avoid anything Google related all together. To clarify about the DNS servers, there are two internal DNS server types and there is also non-internal DNS servers that can be found in the client area under the "DNS Info" tab:


Internal Adblock DNS: 10.26.0.1

Internal Standard DNS: 10.9.0.1, 10.8.0.1

Standard DNS: US based servers, won't be ideal if you are not close to them. My preferred servers, also have used the internals from time to time and had no issue. Not sure what the difference between the internal and non-internal, I have only recently noticed the internals being in the Desktop Client; maybe TorGuard when they have a chance can add documentation explaining their DNS in detail some time in future.

Benchmarking Tools (for future readers): DNSPref, GRC Benchmark, Namebench — there is an updated fork for Namebench on Github called "NAMEinator".


As for giving you reasons for recommending TorGuard, I've already given you the reasons — and that is... Privacy and Trust. If you want a detailed explanation of how TorGuard DNS servers work and what are the benefits of using them your best bet is to talk to TorGuard with that one as they can give you the best possible answers related to their own network.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -1
7 hours ago, TorGuard said:

You really expect anyone to read or respond to everything you just wrote (I stopped at your third multi-quote fyi)? My response was kept simple and to be informational to others. For the record, I know some of the things I wrote are flawed and not clear, I tried to edit my message few hours after I posted it but the site does not allow you to do so. I even reported my own message to have it deleted or manually edited but the staff on the forum are not active so here we are now. I saved my revised response, which is mainly put in a simple format to help others instead of this back and forth non-sense that you're doing now over someones opinion and recommendation.

 

Here is the revisement, I put this exactly in the report (staff can confirm) and did not change anything after your recent response. I suggest you move on and find something better to do with your time, as I'm not going to waste mine any longer with you and your false assumptions/facts.

 

 

Hello, sorry for delayed response if you were expecting one. Interesting to see the TorGuard DNS servers are faster in most cases, for me personally trusting your DNS server is more important than speed. I trust TorGuard and while I don't know the in's and out's of how their DNS servers work, they work good for me and I recommend others to use if you have a VPN service with TorGuard (would you trust Google who is known to collect data on users or would you trust a privacy service you pay for that offers DNS servers). It's good practice to avoid anything Google related all together. To clarify about the DNS servers, there are two internal DNS server types and there is also non-internal DNS servers that can be found in the client area under the "DNS Info" tab:


Internal Adblock DNS: 10.26.0.1

Internal Standard DNS: 10.9.0.1, 10.8.0.1

Standard DNS: US based servers, won't be ideal if you are not close to them. My preferred servers, also have used the internals from time to time and had no issue. Not sure what the difference between the internal and non-internal, I have only recently noticed the internals being in the Desktop Client; maybe TorGuard when they have a chance can add documentation explaining their DNS in detail some time in future.

Benchmarking Tools (for future readers): DNSPref, GRC Benchmark, Namebench — there is an updated fork for Namebench on Github called "NAMEinator".


As for giving you reasons for recommending TorGuard, I've already given you the reasons — and that is... Privacy and Trust. If you want a detailed explanation of how TorGuard DNS servers work and what are the benefits of using them your best bet is to talk to TorGuard with that one as they can give you the best possible answers related to their own network.

I stopped reading after your first sentence. I do not expect anything from you. I did not read your further reply. Next time you might choose better username and next time you might not give recommendations about something that you do not have a clue. That short enough? I indeed waisted time talking to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -1
7 hours ago, TorGuard said:

Here is the revisement, I put this exactly in the report (staff can confirm) and did not change anything after your recent response. I suggest you move on and find something better to do with your time, as I'm not going to waste mine any longer with you and your false assumptions/facts.

@Support user named after your product calls other user liers :) because he got confused in own explanations, lol. Seems another one bites the dust by requesting not to talk here and claiming other users lie. I really hope you write for your customers real info so that you are users do not rely on tips of people who claim in next sentence having not much clue about it. Oh, a lier calling other user a lier is I guees a moment where this thread should be locked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -1

Yes I said I was going to move on, but what you just wrote is pile of hot garbage and I'm not going to let you get away with that. For anyone else reading this, I would like to point out, that there is a bug with this forum, it made 19807409's recent posts appear above my previous message from the day before making it look like I'm responding twice in row and the posts are out of order. Anyways, let's get on to it.

 

17 hours ago, 19807409 said:

I stopped reading after your first sentence. I do not expect anything from you. I did not read your further reply.

 

This is a lie, as your next post clearly shows you reading after the first sentence, specifically you responded to "Here is the revisement". For you to say others contradict themselves, you're contradicting yourself with this sentence but you never contradict yourself right?

 

17 hours ago, 19807409 said:

Next time you might choose better username and next time you might not give recommendations about something that you do not have a clue.

 

At least I'm honest with what I know and don't know, unlike you who goes around on these forums with massive useless walls of text that no one asked for thinking everything you say is 100% accurate. It is 100% fact that I don't know the in's and out's of TorGuard servers, because if I did that would mean that I would have direct access to their servers to see how they have everything configured (sure I could maybe ask for that information but I still wouldn't know everything about the backend!). Even you, would not know the in's and out's of TorGuard DNS or any other DNS server unless you had direct access to it. All you've done in this thread is made assumptions on things you don't know, like mistaking the non-adblock internal DNS server for being a adblock server and then assuming I use internal DNS. Hypocrite. What does a username have to do with anything on this forum, there is plenty of users with TorGuard in their name, you even have your little api github named "TorGuard" and you call it TorGuard API like it's official and people should trust your instructions. You sound salty that I took the name before you could. I put specifically "Not Affiliated" in my footer to avoid any misconception that I could be staff (which I'm not) and I speak for myself as a customer like you.

 

17 hours ago, 19807409 said:

That short enough? I indeed waisted time talking to you.

 

Yes, short and sweet is the way I like it. This is a waste of time and quite stupid from both of us. I wish my post was possible to be edited as all this now would probably been avoided, which is shame as I think we do share some common ground of wanting to help others in an accurate informative manner. The constant passive aggressiveness from you with both your use of emojis and confrontational nature on these forums makes it difficult for us to have a civil debate or discussion.

 

17 hours ago, 19807409 said:

@Support user named after your product calls other user liers :) because he got confused in own explanations, lol. Seems another one bites the dust by requesting not to talk here and claiming other users lie.

 

Haven't called you a liar besides calling your assumptions/facts false, which doesn't translate in English to calling you a liar. Being wrong is okay, we all are wrong at times and make mistakes. However I did call you a liar at the top of this post, so you can call that a fact now.

 

17 hours ago, 19807409 said:

I really hope you write for your customers real info so that you are users do not rely on tips of people who claim in next sentence having not much clue about it.

 

This really is weak and makes barely any sense, I can see why you write massive walls of text for something that could take a couple sentences summarized.

 

17 hours ago, 19807409 said:

Seems another one bites the dust by requesting not to talk here and claiming other users lie.

 

I only suggested that we move on as we're only going to continue to aggravate each other, which is not healthy for either of us. I value my time, and I'm sure you have better things to be doing than getting into a pissing match with someone on a forum. Again, I never claimed you lied, I only said things you said were false aka wrong which is not the same as calling someone a liar.

 

17 hours ago, 19807409 said:

this thread should be locked.

 

I agree, unfortunate that is something that should be considered but with this mess it is necessary. As for further responses, I have no doubt that you will respond to this post with more attempts at trying to discredit me with non-sense. First you should read my revision which was made clearer than my original post, or not but then what is your objective in this thread if it's not just to talk about my recommendation being invalid? This all started with you trying to discredit my opinion and recommendation to another user to use another DNS than Google, remember that before you respond again. We don't have to agree with/or like each other, that is fine. Also I would like to hope you were not the one to down vote my post to give you the benefit of the doubt, but if you did you're one salty boy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -1
On 7/25/2021 at 8:56 AM, TorGuard said:

You really expect anyone to read or respond to everything you just wrote (I stopped at your third multi-quote fyi)? My response was kept simple and to be informational to others. For the record, I know some of the things I wrote are flawed and not clear, I tried to edit my message few hours after I posted it but the site does not allow you to do so. I even reported my own message to have it deleted or manually edited but the staff on the forum are not active so here we are now. I saved my revised response, which is mainly put in a simple format to help others instead of this back and forth non-sense that you're doing now over someones opinion and recommendation.

 

Here is the revisement, I put this exactly in the report (staff can confirm) and did not change anything after your recent response. I suggest you move on and find something better to do with your time, as I'm not going to waste mine any longer with you and your false assumptions/facts.

 

 

Hello, sorry for delayed response if you were expecting one. Interesting to see the TorGuard DNS servers are faster in most cases, for me personally trusting your DNS server is more important than speed. I trust TorGuard and while I don't know the in's and out's of how their DNS servers work, they work good for me and I recommend others to use if you have a VPN service with TorGuard (would you trust Google who is known to collect data on users or would you trust a privacy service you pay for that offers DNS servers). It's good practice to avoid anything Google related all together. To clarify about the DNS servers, there are two internal DNS server types and there is also non-internal DNS servers that can be found in the client area under the "DNS Info" tab:


Internal Adblock DNS: 10.26.0.1

Internal Standard DNS: 10.9.0.1, 10.8.0.1

Standard DNS: US based servers, won't be ideal if you are not close to them. My preferred servers, also have used the internals from time to time and had no issue. Not sure what the difference between the internal and non-internal, I have only recently noticed the internals being in the Desktop Client; maybe TorGuard when they have a chance can add documentation explaining their DNS in detail some time in future.

Benchmarking Tools (for future readers): DNSPref, GRC Benchmark, Namebench — there is an updated fork for Namebench on Github called "NAMEinator".


As for giving you reasons for recommending TorGuard, I've already given you the reasons — and that is... Privacy and Trust. If you want a detailed explanation of how TorGuard DNS servers work and what are the benefits of using them your best bet is to talk to TorGuard with that one as they can give you the best possible answers related to their own network.

 

Another troll, you are nothing more than that, not the first and not the last, but not one of the smartest. Should I call you an idiot, stupid or simply retarded? What would explain your stupid comments and provocation. I am sorry, you neither have a clue about vpn, dns, not torguard itself, a shame that you took torguard as your username, not for torguard, shame on you.

Ok, what kind of a bug do you need to report? Normally one thinks it is ok if somebody does not know something, but you first give advices based on 0 knowledge then you later claim that there is a bug in a forum which is not, your post simply got downvoted and it appears under any with higher votes. You did not know it? How about checking their forum software's documentation? Oh, no, you are incapable of doing so, instead you falsely claiim again there is a bug, lol

You broke actually several forum rules, and you continue with baseless insults, a retarded lier calls me a lier because retarded lier is incapable of informing himself, oh wait, maybe you feel uncomfortable to be with such pitty knowledge posing as :) torguard. You joined this forum as a lier and you are simply a poser, you can waste your time on "not letting me go", but it seems that instead of arguments you simply poo fluids out of your a$$.

I guess you like conversation where a reply is in same language quality as your ramblings. You can't read? Then go to school, stop waisting time of other users in claiming first recommendations about which you have 0 clue, this is dangerous for normal users if they listen to such wannabee's like you :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • -1
2 hours ago, 19807409 said:

Another troll, you are nothing more than that, not the first and not the last, but not one of the smartest. Should I call you an idiot, stupid or simply retarded? What would explain your stupid comments and provocation. I am sorry, you neither have a clue about vpn, dns, not torguard itself, a shame that you took torguard as your username, not for torguard, shame on you.

 

Nice to see that you immediately resort to personal attacks and insults, who is really provoking who here? Troll? I gave a recommendation to another user and you been trying to provoke an argument ever since, and you got it congrats. What about all the other people you provoke on these forums to start an argument (yes I've seen at least two other people that you've had problems with, probably more too).

 

2 hours ago, 19807409 said:

Ok, what kind of a bug do you need to report? Normally one thinks it is ok if somebody does not know something, but you first give advices based on 0 knowledge then you later claim that there is a bug in a forum which is not, your post simply got downvoted and it appears under any with higher votes. You did not know it? How about checking their forum software's documentation? Oh, no, you are incapable of doing so, instead you falsely claiim again there is a bug, lol

 

I was not aware down voting pushed comments down on this forum. That is a fair mistake to make, you're really reaching for straws to use that as a arguing point, it's only showcasing how childish you are. So basically, what this tells me, you solely down voted my comments so your comments would appear on top and so my messages are pushed down and only people see what you have to write? Isn't that the definition of trolling?

 

2 hours ago, 19807409 said:

You broke actually several forum rules, and you continue with baseless insults, a retarded lier calls me a lier because retarded lier is incapable of informing himself, oh wait, maybe you feel uncomfortable to be with such pitty knowledge posing as :) torguard. You joined this forum as a lier and you are simply a poser, you can waste your time on "not letting me go", but it seems that instead of arguments you simply poo fluids out of your a$$.

 

Oh really, cite and link exactly where I broke forum rules, if anyone has broken rules it's you. What baseless insults have I launched against you other than calling you out on your own bullshit? This entire post you made is full of baseless insults, also you haven't stated where I lied other than just calling me a liar - you pushed down my comment about when you first called me a liar explaining otherwise. You say I'm continuing with baseless insults, yet here you are with your post.

 

2 hours ago, 19807409 said:

I guess you like conversation where a reply is in same language quality as your ramblings. You can't read? Then go to school, stop waisting time of other users in claiming first recommendations about which you have 0 clue, this is dangerous for normal users if they listen to such wannabee's like you

 

You're self projecting again. You must be trapped in your own little delusional reality if you believe anything you just wrote. You're also hysterically mad as hell and need to calm down, I've been trying to remain civil with you which it seems like you're incapable of.

 

Dangerous for normal users? Are you trying to say that you're better than everyone else?

 

Edited by TorGuard
Added comment about dangerous users.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...