Cloudron makes it easy to run web apps like WordPress, Nextcloud, GitLab on your server. Find out more or install now.


Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Bookmarks
  • Search
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

Cloudron Forum

Apps | Demo | Docs | Install
  1. Cloudron Forum
  2. App Wishlist
  3. Wireguard VPN

Wireguard VPN

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Solved App Wishlist
wireguard vpncloudronsecurity
108 Posts 29 Posters 30.4k Views 39 Watching
  • 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.
  • robiR Offline
    robiR Offline
    robi
    wrote on last edited by
    #56

    An example config of WG-Easy deployment from:
    https://github.com/WeeJeWel/wg-easy/wiki/Using-WireGuard-Easy-with-nginx-SSL

    docker-compose.yml:

    version: "3.8"
    
    services:
      wg-easy:
        environment:
          # ⚠️ Change the server's hostname (clients will connect to):
          - WG_HOST=wg-easy.myhomelab.com
    
          # ⚠️ Change the Web UI Password:
          - PASSWORD=foobar123
        image: weejewel/wg-easy
        container_name: wg-easy
        hostname: wg-easy
        volumes:
          - ~/.wg-easy:/etc/wireguard
        ports:
          - "51820:51820/udp"
        restart: unless-stopped
        cap_add:
          - NET_ADMIN
          - SYS_MODULE
        sysctls:
          - net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
          - net.ipv4.conf.all.src_valid_mark=1
    
      nginx:
        image: weejewel/nginx-with-certbot
        container_name: nginx
        hostname: nginx
        ports:
          - "80:80/tcp"
          - "443:443/tcp"
        volumes:
          - ~/.nginx/servers/:/etc/nginx/servers/
          - ./.nginx/letsencrypt/:/etc/letsencrypt/
    

    ~/.nginx/servers/wg-easy.conf:

    server {
        server_name `⚠️wg-easy.myhomelab.com`;
    
        location / {
            proxy_pass http://wg-easy:51821/;
            proxy_http_version 1.1;
            proxy_set_header Upgrade $http_upgrade;
            proxy_set_header Connection "Upgrade";
            proxy_set_header Host $host;
        }
    }
    

    Conscious tech

    D 1 Reply Last reply
    5
    • robiR robi

      An example config of WG-Easy deployment from:
      https://github.com/WeeJeWel/wg-easy/wiki/Using-WireGuard-Easy-with-nginx-SSL

      docker-compose.yml:

      version: "3.8"
      
      services:
        wg-easy:
          environment:
            # ⚠️ Change the server's hostname (clients will connect to):
            - WG_HOST=wg-easy.myhomelab.com
      
            # ⚠️ Change the Web UI Password:
            - PASSWORD=foobar123
          image: weejewel/wg-easy
          container_name: wg-easy
          hostname: wg-easy
          volumes:
            - ~/.wg-easy:/etc/wireguard
          ports:
            - "51820:51820/udp"
          restart: unless-stopped
          cap_add:
            - NET_ADMIN
            - SYS_MODULE
          sysctls:
            - net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
            - net.ipv4.conf.all.src_valid_mark=1
      
        nginx:
          image: weejewel/nginx-with-certbot
          container_name: nginx
          hostname: nginx
          ports:
            - "80:80/tcp"
            - "443:443/tcp"
          volumes:
            - ~/.nginx/servers/:/etc/nginx/servers/
            - ./.nginx/letsencrypt/:/etc/letsencrypt/
      

      ~/.nginx/servers/wg-easy.conf:

      server {
          server_name `⚠️wg-easy.myhomelab.com`;
      
          location / {
              proxy_pass http://wg-easy:51821/;
              proxy_http_version 1.1;
              proxy_set_header Upgrade $http_upgrade;
              proxy_set_header Connection "Upgrade";
              proxy_set_header Host $host;
          }
      }
      
      D Offline
      D Offline
      dylightful
      wrote on last edited by
      #57

      @robi lots of solutions/apps for WG on the web, not entitely sure whats stopping/preventing the CLoudron team packaging and deploying considerings it one of the most upvoted wishlist items currently, especially when plenty of low upvote apps are getting published before WG.

      Care to enlight us? @girish

      timconsidineT robiR 2 Replies Last reply
      1
      • D dylightful

        @robi lots of solutions/apps for WG on the web, not entitely sure whats stopping/preventing the CLoudron team packaging and deploying considerings it one of the most upvoted wishlist items currently, especially when plenty of low upvote apps are getting published before WG.

        Care to enlight us? @girish

        timconsidineT Offline
        timconsidineT Offline
        timconsidine
        App Dev
        wrote on last edited by
        #58

        @dylightful possibly the low vote apps don't have the complexity of integration into the Cloudron 'opinionated' environment. But I don't know really.

        1 Reply Last reply
        1
        • D dylightful

          @robi lots of solutions/apps for WG on the web, not entitely sure whats stopping/preventing the CLoudron team packaging and deploying considerings it one of the most upvoted wishlist items currently, especially when plenty of low upvote apps are getting published before WG.

          Care to enlight us? @girish

          robiR Offline
          robiR Offline
          robi
          wrote on last edited by
          #59

          @dylightful I hear you.. it has not been made clear yet.

          I just managed to deploy wg-easy in fly.io and it's simple UI is great, doesn't need a username, and similar to our OpenVPN app, easily generates .conf files for download for the clients.

          For some of the things we wanted to do with VPNs for Apps which were a lot more complex, a lot more integrations were needed, and the people who started doing those didn't manage to complete them and the chain of events stopped progress.

          What we perceive being reality, this can affect much simpler things from being re-prioritized; and of course life happens.

          Un/fortunately those are not blockers for Cloudron having a fast personal VPN experience via Wireguard.

          As I have a bit more time this month, I may start packaging wg-easy, and if someone else is interested in lending a helping hand, many hands make short work. (Send a PM to collaborate)

          Conscious tech

          T 1 Reply Last reply
          6
          • robiR robi

            @dylightful I hear you.. it has not been made clear yet.

            I just managed to deploy wg-easy in fly.io and it's simple UI is great, doesn't need a username, and similar to our OpenVPN app, easily generates .conf files for download for the clients.

            For some of the things we wanted to do with VPNs for Apps which were a lot more complex, a lot more integrations were needed, and the people who started doing those didn't manage to complete them and the chain of events stopped progress.

            What we perceive being reality, this can affect much simpler things from being re-prioritized; and of course life happens.

            Un/fortunately those are not blockers for Cloudron having a fast personal VPN experience via Wireguard.

            As I have a bit more time this month, I may start packaging wg-easy, and if someone else is interested in lending a helping hand, many hands make short work. (Send a PM to collaborate)

            T Offline
            T Offline
            timka
            wrote on last edited by timka
            #60

            @robi wg-easy seems to be a nice alternative to the openvpn solution, it's also dockered: https://hub.docker.com/r/weejewel/wg-easy but I'm not sure how stable it is?

            robiR D 2 Replies Last reply
            2
            • T timka

              @robi wg-easy seems to be a nice alternative to the openvpn solution, it's also dockered: https://hub.docker.com/r/weejewel/wg-easy but I'm not sure how stable it is?

              robiR Offline
              robiR Offline
              robi
              wrote on last edited by
              #61

              @timka It is stable and just works.

              Conscious tech

              1 Reply Last reply
              1
              • T timka

                @robi wg-easy seems to be a nice alternative to the openvpn solution, it's also dockered: https://hub.docker.com/r/weejewel/wg-easy but I'm not sure how stable it is?

                D Offline
                D Offline
                dylightful
                wrote on last edited by
                #62

                @timka Can confirm it works great and is very stable.

                I ended up deploying a cluster a couple of months after apps with not even 1/3 of the upvotes were getting deployed before Wireguard. Very frustrating and disappointing.

                1 Reply Last reply
                2
                • K Offline
                  K Offline
                  kallados
                  wrote on last edited by kallados
                  #63

                  On the one site I understand. There is lot of different Apps, they can be usable for many users. For example I use N8N. It's not perfect YET, way but more then “just usable”. Everytime when I see, that someone ask about alternative...i get angry. I ask me all time, why should we implement something new just like N8N? We have already automating stuff and it's working. Why integrate some alternative with the unknown potential?...

                  On other side in this Case- Open VPN have no real Potential in long term. It's working great. No doubt. Just this CPU Power Consumption is Kill Criterium. OVPN is for me like a Airpords 2. Generation. Working pretty well, but we have already something better. Nobody really except, that we use something like this, in next year's.

                  I pay fresh extra for Wireguard and so long working, I have no needs to pay for a next Cloudron Subscription. I have encrypted Storage, Email on own Domain and quick WG VPN with Proton unlimited. I can just pay few bucks for Integromat/make and that's all. No worries about own Server, Security and costs. Sure just my case, but maybe I'm not alone.

                  What I want to say to Cloudron devs- just implement WG in some usable Form (yeah we have them already, maybe just Alphas but who cares) and I will get a great Alterative back again. Cloudron is amazing Concept with huge potential, but must stay up to date.

                  I work on Project (for private Client) who who would be ready to pay 6 Digits Price Yearly, just for possibility to use own safe VPN without Google, Cloudflare etc. just selfhosted, easy, with no needs for huge stuff to maintain it.

                  Just thing about... If you would be able, to deploy own hosted system for WG VPN... with

                  1. easy Installation
                  2. Reduced maintain costs (automatic backups, updated directly from last nux Core/Ubuntu etc)
                  3. Open source

                  Just this “one app” can be enough, to create special WG subscription of Cloudron. Price reduced, just 1-3 apps. You wouldn't get just new Customers, but mainly lot of Attention. And Attention is money.

                  marcusquinnM 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • K kallados

                    On the one site I understand. There is lot of different Apps, they can be usable for many users. For example I use N8N. It's not perfect YET, way but more then “just usable”. Everytime when I see, that someone ask about alternative...i get angry. I ask me all time, why should we implement something new just like N8N? We have already automating stuff and it's working. Why integrate some alternative with the unknown potential?...

                    On other side in this Case- Open VPN have no real Potential in long term. It's working great. No doubt. Just this CPU Power Consumption is Kill Criterium. OVPN is for me like a Airpords 2. Generation. Working pretty well, but we have already something better. Nobody really except, that we use something like this, in next year's.

                    I pay fresh extra for Wireguard and so long working, I have no needs to pay for a next Cloudron Subscription. I have encrypted Storage, Email on own Domain and quick WG VPN with Proton unlimited. I can just pay few bucks for Integromat/make and that's all. No worries about own Server, Security and costs. Sure just my case, but maybe I'm not alone.

                    What I want to say to Cloudron devs- just implement WG in some usable Form (yeah we have them already, maybe just Alphas but who cares) and I will get a great Alterative back again. Cloudron is amazing Concept with huge potential, but must stay up to date.

                    I work on Project (for private Client) who who would be ready to pay 6 Digits Price Yearly, just for possibility to use own safe VPN without Google, Cloudflare etc. just selfhosted, easy, with no needs for huge stuff to maintain it.

                    Just thing about... If you would be able, to deploy own hosted system for WG VPN... with

                    1. easy Installation
                    2. Reduced maintain costs (automatic backups, updated directly from last nux Core/Ubuntu etc)
                    3. Open source

                    Just this “one app” can be enough, to create special WG subscription of Cloudron. Price reduced, just 1-3 apps. You wouldn't get just new Customers, but mainly lot of Attention. And Attention is money.

                    marcusquinnM Offline
                    marcusquinnM Offline
                    marcusquinn
                    wrote on last edited by marcusquinn
                    #64

                    @kallados I'll take those 6 figures, if they start with a £ 😄 .

                    I've come to the opinion that Cloudron just wants to do what it wants to do, and has a glass ceiling to solve with getting more app packaging expertise to do things the Cloudron way, so we just need to use alternatives to Cloudron to run alongside it in the meantime: Proxmox, Cloudpanel, Caprover, Univention, YunoHost, Bitnami, Rancher, Portainer, CasaOS, Umbrel, and more...

                    Web Design https://www.evergreen.je
                    Development https://brandlight.org
                    Life https://marcusquinn.com

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • nebulonN Offline
                      nebulonN Offline
                      nebulon
                      Staff
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #65

                      @kallados quite frankly if you have 6 figures yearly for that, then this is easily solvable with providing your own solution to the problem. No need to get Cloudron involved here for 15$/mth. I am sure, it will be just a bunch of shell scripts.

                      @marcusquinn the glass ceiling is simply time on our side. Technically providing such a package for Cloudron is often not far out, but initial work to a proper package following our requirements and especially ongoing maintenance and support requires time. It is not like we don't package apps for the fun of blocking our users. By now most of our time is spent in updating apps so they can be rolled out, without breaking all the time. Often debugging one app for one update eats many hours.

                      Further, one can already create custom packages for Cloudron, running cloudron build && cloudron install inside that folder solves it already. If those packages are well written, then we have picked them up in the past and pulled them into our supported library after some required polish. We will soon work on a better solution to have these available for others without required commandline knowledge. We hope to remove us a bit as the bottleneck then, afterall our business is not selling app packages and the support for those, but the platform to run them.

                      K marcusquinnM 2 Replies Last reply
                      13
                      • nebulonN nebulon

                        @kallados quite frankly if you have 6 figures yearly for that, then this is easily solvable with providing your own solution to the problem. No need to get Cloudron involved here for 15$/mth. I am sure, it will be just a bunch of shell scripts.

                        @marcusquinn the glass ceiling is simply time on our side. Technically providing such a package for Cloudron is often not far out, but initial work to a proper package following our requirements and especially ongoing maintenance and support requires time. It is not like we don't package apps for the fun of blocking our users. By now most of our time is spent in updating apps so they can be rolled out, without breaking all the time. Often debugging one app for one update eats many hours.

                        Further, one can already create custom packages for Cloudron, running cloudron build && cloudron install inside that folder solves it already. If those packages are well written, then we have picked them up in the past and pulled them into our supported library after some required polish. We will soon work on a better solution to have these available for others without required commandline knowledge. We hope to remove us a bit as the bottleneck then, afterall our business is not selling app packages and the support for those, but the platform to run them.

                        K Offline
                        K Offline
                        kallados
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #66

                        @nebulon

                        This WG Implementation is not the only task in the budget 🙂 Maybe the wrong way I expressed myself. We are working on it. But it won't be open source and I find that a pity.

                        No matter what, such a solution under Cloudron would be usable for many I think. Straight for our customer not, but there are many out there who would like to use it-me included. I see a similarity here as with Bitwarden. I used Bitwarden under Cloudron for a long time. Super easy, no hassle and with my own server. The same would be possible with WG.

                        marcusquinnM 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • K kallados

                          @nebulon

                          This WG Implementation is not the only task in the budget 🙂 Maybe the wrong way I expressed myself. We are working on it. But it won't be open source and I find that a pity.

                          No matter what, such a solution under Cloudron would be usable for many I think. Straight for our customer not, but there are many out there who would like to use it-me included. I see a similarity here as with Bitwarden. I used Bitwarden under Cloudron for a long time. Super easy, no hassle and with my own server. The same would be possible with WG.

                          marcusquinnM Offline
                          marcusquinnM Offline
                          marcusquinn
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #67

                          @kallados Worth searching the forum here for "Mesh VPN" too, as there's a few apps on the wishlist that also use Wireguard behind the scenes to make Wireguard private networking super-easy to administer.

                          Web Design https://www.evergreen.je
                          Development https://brandlight.org
                          Life https://marcusquinn.com

                          robiR 1 Reply Last reply
                          1
                          • marcusquinnM marcusquinn

                            @kallados Worth searching the forum here for "Mesh VPN" too, as there's a few apps on the wishlist that also use Wireguard behind the scenes to make Wireguard private networking super-easy to administer.

                            robiR Offline
                            robiR Offline
                            robi
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #68

                            @marcusquinn Yes, such as TailScale which Umbrel uses by default for securing access to itself.

                            Conscious tech

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            2
                            • nebulonN nebulon

                              @kallados quite frankly if you have 6 figures yearly for that, then this is easily solvable with providing your own solution to the problem. No need to get Cloudron involved here for 15$/mth. I am sure, it will be just a bunch of shell scripts.

                              @marcusquinn the glass ceiling is simply time on our side. Technically providing such a package for Cloudron is often not far out, but initial work to a proper package following our requirements and especially ongoing maintenance and support requires time. It is not like we don't package apps for the fun of blocking our users. By now most of our time is spent in updating apps so they can be rolled out, without breaking all the time. Often debugging one app for one update eats many hours.

                              Further, one can already create custom packages for Cloudron, running cloudron build && cloudron install inside that folder solves it already. If those packages are well written, then we have picked them up in the past and pulled them into our supported library after some required polish. We will soon work on a better solution to have these available for others without required commandline knowledge. We hope to remove us a bit as the bottleneck then, afterall our business is not selling app packages and the support for those, but the platform to run them.

                              marcusquinnM Offline
                              marcusquinnM Offline
                              marcusquinn
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #69

                              @nebulon Just a thought, maybe we're thinking in the wrong direction, and there should be a reduction of apps that are costing you too much maintenance time, if there's better alternatives also available?

                              Web Design https://www.evergreen.je
                              Development https://brandlight.org
                              Life https://marcusquinn.com

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              2
                              • J Offline
                                J Offline
                                jayonrails
                                translator
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #70

                                @girish is there any news on a Wireguard implementation for Cloudron?

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                3
                                • ajtatumA Offline
                                  ajtatumA Offline
                                  ajtatum
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #71

                                  Would be great to have wg-easy...

                                  D 1 Reply Last reply
                                  1
                                  • ajtatumA ajtatum

                                    Would be great to have wg-easy...

                                    D Offline
                                    D Offline
                                    dylightful
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #72

                                    @ajtatum been waiting for years, always overlooked. Hosting wg-easy is just good these days anyway...

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    1
                                    • D Offline
                                      D Offline
                                      dylightful
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #73

                                      alt text

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      8
                                      • K Offline
                                        K Offline
                                        kymj8
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #74

                                        I found an update here.

                                        @girish said in What's coming in 7.5:

                                        Unfortunately, the wireguard/openvpn integration has to be done in 7.6 . It's a pretty big feature and it's unlikely to be done in 7.5 timeframe.

                                        But it was also listed in 7.3 announcement 14 months ago.

                                        @girish said in What's coming in 7.3:

                                        OpenVPN/Wireguard integration

                                        And this original request here dates back to 2019.
                                        Consider the number upvotes it would be nice to see some better communication on this; Maybe in this thread.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        3
                                        • RoundHouse1924R Offline
                                          RoundHouse1924R Offline
                                          RoundHouse1924
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #75

                                          4 years down the line and now the top voted-for outstanding item in the App Wishlist.

                                          Although Wireguard is perhaps "not enterprise-ready", as suggested by OPNsense on Twitter, it is surely vastly superior to OpenVPN:-
                                          https://twitter.com/opnsense/status/1654516200896884741?s=20

                                          @staff
                                          Please, please keep this app at the top of your new apps queue.

                                          Very much looking forwards to the release day!

                                          BrutalBirdieB 1 Reply Last reply
                                          6
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Bookmarks
                                          • Search