pfSense » pfSense Packages

They have made a secure and audited release.
We'd prefer to use pfSense but are using OpenWRT for wireguard support.

For those who might not be following it, WireGuard is going to be integrated into the Linux kernel 5.6 release, which means both that it is at a point where it is considered ready for general consumption and that use of WireGuard is likely to become much more common in the next couple of years.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/at-long-last-wireguard-vpn-is-on-its-way-into-linux/

We are fully aware. It's good news for them, but that does not mean much of anything for its implementation or stability on FreeBSD (yet).

Thats sad, I really hope WireGuard could be implemented in pfSense as soon as possible. The performance and security advantage over OpenVPN/Strongswan is huge. Strongswan had a lot of vulnerabilities, the implementation is way to complex. Could the priority of this issue be raised?

PLEASE add WireGuard support! Thank you.

Now that wireguard is officially linux upstream, which is a proof of trust to a certain level, you may want to reconsider your decision. I know Wireguard is still considered WIP, but it takes a lots of trust to be merged in the linux kernel.

See note 5 on this issue: https://redmine.pfsense.org/issues/8786#note-5

Linux is not FreeBSD.

See these links:
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=357986
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=357987

FreeBSD is making commits for in-kernel wireguard. It's coming.

Lai Wei-Hwa wrote:

See these links:
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=357986
https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=357987

FreeBSD is making commits for in-kernel wireguard. It's coming.

Great! Looking forward to this!
WG is pretty much what I needed for years, and badly improvise with IPsec...
...hope this makes into pfSense soon.

wireguard-go exists on FreeBSD. While it may not be in-kernel, it's a userspace implementation from the same project. There's no reason to continue delaying this.

There certainly is reason. We're working on the in-kernel implementation and won't be wasting our time on unstable userspace implementations. It's still progressing well, just not publicly except what can be seen in the code going into FreeBSD directly.

Take as much time as you need to get it right. I would rather have a stable, in-kernel implementation than a buggy, userspace implementation.

Jim Pingle wrote:

There certainly is reason. We're working on the in-kernel implementation and won't be wasting our time on unstable userspace implementations. It's still progressing well, just not publicly except what can be seen in the code going into FreeBSD directly.

Do you guys have any updates? I know you're doing as good as you can and I appreciate all your hard work, but an update to this would be a great light in these dark times :)