• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 15 days ago
cake
Cake day: June 5th, 2025

help-circle

  • Yeah, if the student devices are locked down its done so per policy. Creating VMs which allow students to bypass that policy is going to potentially get you into trouble with administration. IT could maybe setup those students with Citrix Workspaces or something similar they support to achieve that without having to throw student restrictions out the window.


  • So, this was more common when WEP encryption was used. You could just listen to the radio traffic of the given network and collect IVs which the encryption would leak. Once you had enough pieces you could reassemble the key and access the network. When WPA came out it was harder, but tools like pyrit and john the ripper helped, so long as you were able to capture the 4-way TCP handshake.

    To actually see the networks, you would build biquad parabolic antennas from old DirecTV dishes people left behind. They were very directional high gain antennas that you would just target at someone’s house. We’d also build cantennas from junk laying around. Those were interesting days.





  • Tailscale has the funnel command which exposes services like how you describe, but that’s off the table.

    Not quite sure I understand your layout, but if these are separate VPNs, you could run one from the server with a port forward (guessing that’s not through Mullvad as they don’t offer forwards any longer - to my knowledge) and then setup the general VPN on your router perhaps so you don’t have to change ip routes for the whole network. You would still probably need to setup an ip route specific to the server VPN traffic on the router at that point, but that would probably be less work.

    If this all being done from the same device then you would need to separate them out by IP routes.




  • Ok, this is your summarized argument: Accel is going to gut the company and run it into the ground because that’s what they do, but they haven’t ever done that, but they could, so they will, so that’s the same as doing it, although they haven’t, but it will happen in the end because that’s what they do, but they don’t.

    Its not a strawman if what you say is in fact a weakly constructed idea. Its just a weakly constructed idea then. Its nothing but vague generalizations and “what ifs” you posted. Let me just put it this way: evidence or stfu.







  • Historically, Accel has never pushed acquisition. On the contrary, they do the opposite. Its why they VC fund over 300 companies, but you’ve never heard of them. That’s not to say they couldn’t, but they haven’t ever acted in that manner previously so logically it would be safe to assume that trend continues with Tailscale. I think that’s important here: its not about ability its about intent. If as a organization you give funding to another organization (even non-profits) you exercise at least some control over them as they are dependent on that money to function. This is actually a point other commenters have made in regards to Headscale. Headscale is maintained by a Tailscale employee. As they fund him personally, they can exercise some control over him as he depends on that money/employment. Again, even their comments circle back to ability vs intent. Tailscale could influence their employee, but would they? That’s where a lot of the VC argument goes. Its just speculation as what a group could do, not what they would do.




  • Firstly, I’m not trying to start a flame war with commenters, I genuinely just disagree on something and some people are getting a little hot under the collar by it. The Linux Foundation comment I made because ultimately VC touches more than people think. Even its something that isn’t directly tied to VC, that money filters through groups like LF which is a non-profit and most would argue a quite legitimate organization. The point is there really is no separation or clear line of demarcation on what is “good” funding and what is “bad” funding.