[HOME] [DOWNLOAD] [DOCS] [NEWS] [SUPPORT] [TIPS] [ISSUES] [DONATE]

[Closed: Not possible] socks5 udp tunneling

Development
#1

Patrick can you please describe the methodology and software you used to test this. What led you to this conclusion?

Using Tor directly as the socks5 client won’t work because Tor does not support the protocol. UDP support is a sufficient but not necessary condition for socks5 proxifiers. What is needed need is some other locally installed socks5 client on the WS (with UDP Associate support) that is then configured to connect to a remote socks5 server.

Further Notes

  1. Proxychains is easy to use but lacks UDP support.
  2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_proxifiers Is a good list to start from. Some options such as Dante and redsocks seem to be a good start but their learning curve is somewhat steep.
#2

Tor has socks5 support.

Tor does not support UDP. (https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/7830)

I never said “socks5 proxyfiers generally do not work”. (See wiki, contains references to torsocks, uwt, proxychains, redsocks.) The context of that article is “tunnel UDP over Tor”. And tunneling UDP over Tor by using a single socks5 server won’t work. At least no one ever demonstrated that.

(At least not directly. One could involve OpenVPN in TCP mode through socks5. But still. Only TCP can flow through the socks5. [OpenVPN traffic.] But let’s not get into nuances.)

#3
Tor has socks5 support.

Tor does not support UDP.

Yes I know.

I never said "socks5 proxyfiers generally do not work". (See wiki, contains references to torsocks, uwt, proxychains, redsocks.) The context of that article is "tunnel UDP over Tor". [b]And tunneling UDP over Tor by using a single socks5 server won't work. At least no one ever demonstrated that.[/b]

Was not implying that. The bolded statement is what I want to investigate more.

(At least not directly. One could involve OpenVPN in TCP mode through socks5. But still. Only TCP can flow through the socks5. [OpenVPN traffic.] But let's not get into nuances.)

Alright so if I understand correctly, the OpenVPN from the outside must be TCP while the data in the tunnel is the full IP protocol. Socks5 cannot act the same? Do you know if that’s how it is?

#4

https://superuser.com/a/678531 (Talks about socks5 being used to relay UDP over TCP in a way similar to the SSH method noted on our wiki. Now there are no free/legit SSH servers out there for public use so socks5 seems the obvious choice.)

#5

Maybe this helps:
http://www.textndata.com/forums/how-socks-5-udp-associate-226128.html

I think so.

#6
Maybe this helps: http://www.textndata.com/forums/how-socks-5-udp-associate-226128.html

Yes very much thanks. Its clear then that the UDP ports are negotiated over socks5 using TCP but the UDP packets are then set in a raw form without any tunneling involved.

Its a very interesting topic and I’ve started to brainstorm some alternatives for tunneling UDP over TCPp or IP over TCP

There is this whole other area of using HTTP to tunnel UDP over TCP:

search term used: “udp over http”
[1] https://github.com/ambrop72/badvpn/issues/1
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4681975
[3] http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~lennox/udptunnel/
[4] http://epubl.ltu.se/1402-1617/2003/125/

#7


Unfortunately most people throwing around the term tunneling over HTTP/HTTPS are actually talking about OpenVPN which is not what I’m interested in for the purpose of this topic.

Case closed.

[Imprint] [Privacy Policy] [Cookie Policy] [Terms of Use] [E-Sign Consent] [DMCA] [Investors] [Priority Support] [Professional Support]