• cellardoor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    22 hours ago
    • It is inefficient in both tunnel and transport mode, sacrificing 20-30% of available bandwidth.
    • It is cryptographically expensive, making your clients work harder and costing the VPN provider more money to host nodes.
    • It is complex to setup and deploy.
    • Uses outdated crypto.
    • Operates in Userspace.
    • WireGuard is essentially better in every one of these regards.
    • Scoopta@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      22 hours ago

      OpenVPN operates in kernel space as of 6.16. Well specifically for the data channel. Control channel is still managed in userspace so you don’t have to do asymmetric TLS in the kernel. This also reduces the overhead and increases performance substantially. It is slightly more complicated to setup but barely tbh (I’m speaking from the server side). Is the crypto outdated? Not as far as I’m aware.

      • ISO@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        And user-space implementations of WireGuard are used a lot anyway, especially on mobile. Every VPN provider app ships with one, at least as a backup (It’s wireguard-go usually since boringtun is not well maintained).