this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2024
258 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

32095 readers
573 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Support will be removed on both client and server side.

The process of removing OpenVPN from our app starts today and may be completed much earlier.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 74 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Except the 5 device limit. With OVPN it means 5 connected devices, with WG it means 5 registered public keys.

Say you use the official Mullvad app and also setup some 3rd party WG client on your phone. That's now taking up 2 devices. Or perhaps you do have 6 devices, but you never have more than 2 of them running at once. With WG, that's still 6 devices regardless of them being connected or not, while with OVPN it will indeed be just 2 devices.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Can you not use the same keys for multiple devices like you'd normally be able to?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not at the same time as they would conflict.

[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 week ago

Well sure, but you effectively still have the same 5-connection limit as long as you manage your keys correctly.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

That's always borked both connections for me

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This is a great point, if they're gonna make this change, they should allow unlimited keys (or at least more than 5) and just limit the number of simultaneous devices on wireguard too. If that's feasable

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago

It might be feasible, but it's a bit awkward to implement because Wireguard is stateless and doesn't know if a client is offline or just hasn't sent any traffic for some time.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

That's a pity.

Is there something preventing you from having the same key ready for use on more than one device? So that two devices that are never connected at the same time can take turns using the same key?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

That's true. I use user profiles on GrapheneOS and have to have each profile count as its own device in Mullvad, when obviously I'm not going to be using them simultaneously.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

It just sounds easier to think about it with wireguard then. No surprises.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

One of my devices uses three keys because out of the two local servers I have, they seem to go down every other month, so I need a failover.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Unless they're simultaneously connected you could share the same private key in all of the configs.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I can only assume that is the main reason for this change. Pitty.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago

I already commented on this, but do they actually block you from setting up multiple devices with the same key?

I've had my own server node for a while, there's nothing stopping me from using the same key and config on multiple client devices, as long as I don't connect them at the same time.

I'm not limited to five keys, obviously, but the keys aren't device specific. I could set up just one on the server, and then use it everywhere.

Does Mullwad stop this in some way?