Netgate Discussion Forum
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Search
    • Register
    • Login

    WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved WireGuard
    11 Posts 3 Posters 1.6k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • O
      Onecut
      last edited by

      After updating a Netgate minnow from 23.01 > 23.05 I decided to try Wireguard with ProtonVPN. So I 'Factory Defaulted' the minnow, installed WG pkg and followed the "WireGuard VPN Client Configuration Example" Documentation.

      Here's the ProtonVPN detail for a Router"

      [Interface]
      # Key for bmrr
      # Bouncing = 1
      # NetShield = 1
      # Moderate NAT = off
      # NAT-PMP (Port Forwarding) = off
      # VPN Accelerator = on
      PrivateKey = <snip>
      Address = 10.2.0.2/32
      DNS = 10.2.0.1
      
      [Peer]
      # US-VA#39
      PublicKey = <snip>
      AllowedIPs = 0.0.0.0/0
      Endpoint = 154.47.22.65:51820
      

      First snag occurred with 'Confirm Handshakes' step, There was no 'Show Peers' button. Moving on I changed the default gateway to "WAN_DHCP" then noted there was no "tun_wg<number>" in available ports, just igb0 and igb1.

      I will try again from Factory Default but seek comment on where I am going wrong.

      Thanks,

      Onecut

      DaddyGoD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • DaddyGoD
        DaddyGo @Onecut
        last edited by DaddyGo

        @Onecut said in WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN:

        I decided to try Wireguard with ProtonVPN.

        Hi,

        Experimentally, I tested several VPNs with WG on pfS, I note they did not perform as expected....

        These WG connections are not so easy to set up that you just type in the connection details, even though that's what the WG was supposed to do, but each provider uses the parameters a little differently.

        I've tried these and they definitely work(s), but I installed them all on Ubuntu first and extracted the important connection information:

        ad568761-0f35-4dbf-bfd5-21875347d35d-image.png

        What's more, you can mix instructions from several providers to get a working connection 😉

        None that I have encountered so far have been clear......
        like:
        https://mullvad.net/en/help/pfsense-with-wireguard/
        https://www.ivpn.net/setup/router/pfsense-wireguard/
        and / or

        https://www.comparitech.com/blog/vpn-privacy/pfsense-wireguard-setup/

        and etc.

        Cats bury it so they can't see it!
        (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

        O Bob.DigB 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • O
          Onecut @DaddyGo
          last edited by

          @DaddyGo , My reference to WG Doc refers to Netgate WG recipes. Specifically, WG VPN Client: link text.

          Anyway, the above link is specific as to what bits are needed from the VPN provider but I see there are other WG docs from Netgate as well. I have more reading to do. 🙄

          Beg pardon for my generic reference to WG Docs.

          Thanks for sharing,

          Onecut

          DaddyGoD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • Bob.DigB
            Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @DaddyGo
            last edited by

            @DaddyGo said in WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN:

            https://mullvad.net/en/help/pfsense-with-wireguard/

            Holy moly, that reads complicated. Also it looks like the gateway ip is the same for every tunnel? I thought mullvad would be the gold standard for pfsense wg vpn...

            DaddyGoD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • DaddyGoD
              DaddyGo @Onecut
              last edited by DaddyGo

              @Onecut said in WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN:

              My reference to WG Doc refers to Netgate WG recipes

              Yuppp, this is just an indication of how a standard mode configuration would work.

              In case your provider differs from this, or for example SurfShark NORD :) doesn't give you a router installation description (because it only provides WG through its app), you have to figure it out yourself and you need Linux to do it - in my case I extracted the parameters from the Ubuntu terminal (CLI)

              I repeat myself, the Netgate document is not the guideline here, your provider is always the guideline, nevertheless the first thing you should read is the Netgate Doc to understand the principles of how WG works 😉

              BTW:
              if you really can't do it, I can help you, as soon as I have some time, I'll have access to at least 5-6 VPNs, we'll figure out how to do it on pfS....

              I also have Proton access here in Eu

              Cats bury it so they can't see it!
              (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

              Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • DaddyGoD
                DaddyGo @Bob.Dig
                last edited by DaddyGo

                @Bob-Dig said in WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN:

                mullvad would be the gold standard for pfsense wg vpn

                Yes, because "Christian McD." always tests 😉 with it, but as you say it's the most complicated one to use (only the background, not the setting), although once you get going you'll find out why it's configured that way, but here in the EU it doesn't give you the speed you'd expect, the OpenVPN version is sometimes faster

                PS:

                I will say that the simple WG for Windows,... 10x is faster than the router versions, so I'm sticking with OpenVPN for now, with fast CPU cores or IPsec for StoS.

                What I will be curious about is this " OVPN Data Channel Offload (DCO)"

                https://docs.netgate.com/pfsense/en/latest/vpn/openvpn/dco.html

                this one was very close, :):
                https://www.netgate.com/blog/openvpn-at-netdev-0x16-in-lisbon-portugal

                PS: @Onecut
                a PROTON connection currently under windows can do this here........:

                afff20dd-7728-4aed-b86e-bd08a8a98526-image.png

                29316aaf-d698-47e2-bfff-9d3ed30b0647-image.png

                Cats bury it so they can't see it!
                (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

                Bob.DigB 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • Bob.DigB
                  Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @DaddyGo
                  last edited by

                  @DaddyGo said in WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN:

                  for example SurfShark doesn't give you a router installation description (because it only provides WG through its app),

                  That is nord. SS does provide the configs.

                  DaddyGoD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • Bob.DigB
                    Bob.Dig LAYER 8 @DaddyGo
                    last edited by Bob.Dig

                    @DaddyGo said in WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN:

                    I will say that the simple WG for Windows,... 10x is faster than the router versions, so I'm sticking with OpenVPN for now, with fast CPU cores or IPsec for StoS.

                    No problem here, although I am using some OpenWrt-VMs as WG-Clients to circumvent the "all the same gateway" problem.

                    Capture.PNG

                    DaddyGoD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • DaddyGoD
                      DaddyGo @Bob.Dig
                      last edited by

                      @Bob-Dig said in WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN:

                      SS does provide the configs.

                      I tested these quite a while ago and then there was no configuration of SS specifically for routers, but I'll have a quick look at my account.

                      BTW:
                      I don't use SS much anymore, they have such serious administrators who think that the defense is to ban and not to look for a solution. That's why they disabled port 587 on SS network 😉 , I can be an administrator by keeping spammers out by disabling the standard port, but then no mail, hahahahahah

                      Cats bury it so they can't see it!
                      (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • DaddyGoD
                        DaddyGo @Bob.Dig
                        last edited by

                        @Bob-Dig said in WG with 23.05 and ProtonVPN:

                        OpenWrt-VMs as WG-Clients to circumvent

                        and that's the point, .. that's exactly what I'm doing on another our network, somehow OWrt does it better

                        • only not on VM, but on 4 core miniPCs -

                        Cats bury it so they can't see it!
                        (You know what I mean if you have a cat)

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • O
                          Onecut
                          last edited by

                          I get the picture now wrt WG configs with this or that VPN provider. ProtonVPN has their WG configs but no pfsense setup docs. I haven't used Windows in years and as a 'Linux for Dummies' kind of user I sometimes have a clue. 😊

                          Being a Netgate Minnow w/ 2C Intel Atom (AES-NI) I get about 12MBs (Mega Bytes) sustained but that pushes CPU usage into 50-60% range. That's with OpenVPN, WG may not be feasible.

                          This newish Pfsense/WG howto peeks my interest: link text

                          We'll see.

                          Thanks,

                          Onecut

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • First post
                            Last post
                          Copyright 2025 Rubicon Communications LLC (Netgate). All rights reserved.