今日已更新 35 条资讯 | 累计 37284 条内容
关于我们

标签:#vpn

找到 5 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

How I Built ActiveVPN: A Terminal Tool That Proves (or Exposes) Your VPN

The problem Your VPN client shows a green "Connected" toggle. That's a marketing claim, not a proof. A tunnel can be up while DNS leaks, IPv6 bypasses the route, or your "anonymous" egress sits in a datacenter that any service can fingerprint. How ActiveVPN works The scan collects five groups of signals: Network interfaces — checks psutil.net_if_addrs() against patterns like tun, tap, utun, wg, ipsec, tailscale, zerotier. Processes — iterates running processes and matches them against known VPN/Tor binaries using exact/CLI-token matching (this removed a lot of naive-substring false positives, e.g. "vpn" matching random apps). External IP — queries ip-api.com, ipinfo.io, and ipapi.co in a failover chain for IP, ISP, country, hosting, and proxy flags. DNS — calls edns.ip-api.com to find the resolver IP your DNS queries actually go through. IPv4/IPv6 — fetches both via ipify to spot IPv6 leaks around an IPv4-only tunnel. Verdict scoring Each signal has a weight (interface 50, VPN process 40, Tor 35, hosting 25, proxy 30). The sum, capped at 100, maps to: 0-19 CLEAN 20-39 SUSPICIOUS 40-74 LIKELY VPN/PROXY 75-100 VPN DETECTED Extras worth mentioning Kill switch: sudo activevpn --kill / --kill-force. Watch mode: activevpn --watch 30 with on_change callbacks for VPN-drop alerts. History & export: JSON/CSV/TXT from the platform data directory. Exit codes (0/1/2) so you can wire it into CI. Library API: import activevpn; result = activevpn.scan(); result.verdict.label. Docker image + GitHub Pages docs + full pytest suite running on 3 OSes across Python 3.8 and 3.12. Install pip install activevpn activevpn GitHub: https://github.com/rkriad585/ActiveVPN Docs: https://rkriad585.github.io/ActiveVPN

2026-08-14 原文 →
AI 资讯

VPN Troubleshooting, One Layer at a Time: A Diagnostic Checklist

Most VPN troubleshooting goes wrong in the same predictable way: three things get changed at once, and whatever happens next, nothing has been learned. The alternative is boring and effective — check one layer at a time, in an order that rules things out, and write down what each layer shows. One boundary before starting: troubleshooting means finding where a problem lives, not working against anyone's rules. On a network you don't control, or a device your organization manages, the policies in place stay in place. If a managed device is part of the picture, your organization's IT function is part of the troubleshooting — and switching off device security tooling is never a troubleshooting step. 1. Device basics first Start embarrassingly simple, because this layer resolves more than anyone likes to admit. Restart the VPN client. If that changes nothing, restart the device. Confirm that the operating system and the client are updated. An update that has been pending for weeks is a suspect, not background noise. Note whether anything changed around the time the problem started: an update, a new app, different settings, a different location. 2. Does the internet work without the VPN? Disconnect the VPN entirely and test ordinary browsing. If the connection is broken without the VPN, this isn't a VPN problem yet. Solve the underlying connection first, because nothing downstream is testable until this layer works. If the internet is fine without the VPN and wrong with it, you have genuinely narrowed something down. Write that down. 3. Client state: connected to what, exactly? Open the client and look, rather than assume. Is it actually connected, or still trying? Is the right profile selected — the current one, not an older entry left over from a previous setup? Disconnect and reconnect once, deliberately, and watch what the client reports. If multiple profiles have accumulated in the client, that is a finding in itself. Stale entries are a classic source of "it connect

2026-07-30 原文 →
AI 资讯

How a Slow Office VPN Led Me to File a US Patent

This is the story of how a mundane complaint — "the VPN is slow" — turned into a US patent application. Not a granted patent. An application . I want to be precise about that from the start, because the distance between the two is the whole point of this post. It started with a slow VPN The company I work for had an internal VPN that everyone routed through. It lived in the Tokyo office, it was old, and it was not something I built. Then the complaints started arriving — from a lot of people, all saying the same thing: it's slow. I work from Thailand most of the time. That detail matters. If that aging box in Tokyo had fallen over, I would have been the person furthest from the power button, in the worst position to fix it. A slow VPN is annoying. An unreachable VPN, when you're a few thousand kilometers away, is a real problem. So I started moving it to the cloud. I stood up a WireGuard VPN — modern, fast, and something I could actually reason about and operate remotely instead of inheriting a black box. Down the WireGuard rabbit hole Around that time I was deep into building my own iPhone apps. So the cloud migration turned into a personal project on the side: I built my own server and wired WireGuard into an iPhone app of my own. And to do that properly, I started studying how WireGuard actually works under the hood — the Noise protocol, the handshake, the key exchange. That study is where everything else came from. I wasn't trying to invent anything. I was just trying to understand the thing I was now responsible for. The SYN flood that primed my brain Not long before, the same company had been hit with a SYN flood attack. If you've dealt with one, you know it lodges the mechanics of connection handshakes firmly in your head — the back-and-forth, the round trips, the cost of every "hello" before any real data moves. So I had handshakes on the brain. And then, reading through how WireGuard establishes a session, a thought stopped me: Wait — does it really handsha

2026-06-08 原文 →
AI 资讯

The Third Shadow of CitrixBleed — Large-Scale Exploitation of a NetScaler Memory Overread Reignites

id CTI-2026-0603-NETSCALER title The Third Shadow of CitrixBleed — Large-Scale Exploitation of a NetScaler Memory Overread Reignites subtitle CVE-2026-3055: a March-disclosed SAML IdP information-disclosure flaw escalates in June — the gap between the "RCE" label and the real impact author Dennis Kim (김호광 / HoKwang Kim) email gameworker@gmail.com github gameworkerkim date 2026-06-03 classification TLP:GREEN severity CRITICAL lang en tags Edge-Device · Pre-Auth · Memory-Overread · Session-Hijack · SAML-SSO · CitrixBleed · CISA-KEV threat_actors Unattributed (likely a mix of ransomware and state-sponsored actors) cve CVE-2026-3055 (CVSS 9.3 v4.0 · CISA KEV) · related CVE-2026-4368 (CVSS 7.7) frameworks MITRE ATT&CK · NIST SP 800-61 · NIST SP 800-207 (Zero Trust) · CISA KEV · STIX/TAXII license CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 🚨 Heads-up: this is a VPN/remote-access issue — check your company's appliances now. If your organization runs Citrix NetScaler Gateway (the VPN / remote-access front door) or NetScaler ADC with SAML SSO enabled, you may be directly exposed to active, large-scale exploitation. Don't wait for a formal advisory to land in your inbox — inventory your internet-facing NetScaler appliances today , confirm patch level, and (critically) invalidate active sessions after patching . The details below explain why patching alone is not enough. The Third Shadow of CitrixBleed — Large-Scale Exploitation of a NetScaler Memory Overread Reignites Report ID CTI-2026-0603-NETSCALER · Published 2026-06-03 · Classification TLP:GREEN · Severity 🔴 CRITICAL Author Dennis Kim (김호광) · gameworker@gmail.com · @gameworkerkim CVE-2026-3055: a March-disclosed SAML IdP information-disclosure flaw escalates in June — the gap between the "RCE" label and the real impact Table of Contents Executive Summary (TL;DR) Opening — "An edge device, once it leaks, keeps leaking" Vulnerability Analysis — CVE-2026-3055 Memory Overread "RCE" or "Information Disclosure"? — Decomposing the Real Impact Timeline —

2026-06-03 原文 →