Lite VPN vs Traditional VPN: Which is Right for You?

Lite VPN vs Traditional VPN: Which is Right for You?

Performance and Speed Comparison

Performance and Speed Comparison


In the ever-evolving world of digital connectivity, the choice between a Lite VPN and a Traditional VPN can significantly impact your online experience, particularly when it comes to performance and speed. Learn more about Lite VPN here. Each option has its own advantages and drawbacks, and understanding these can help you make an informed decision about which is right for you.


Firstly, lets delve into Lite VPNs. As the name suggests, Lite VPNs are designed to be lightweight and user-friendly. They are often tailored for users who prioritize speed and simplicity over extensive features. One of the main advantages of Lite VPNs is their minimalistic design, which allows them to run smoothly on a variety of devices, including those with limited processing power. This can lead to faster connection speeds, as the VPN software requires fewer resources to operate. For users looking to access geo-restricted content or maintain a basic level of privacy without sacrificing speed, a Lite VPN could be an ideal choice.


In contrast, Traditional VPNs are robust and comprehensive, offering a wide range of features to ensure maximum security and privacy. They are typically equipped with advanced encryption protocols and a larger network of servers, providing users with greater flexibility and control over their online activities. However, this added security can come at the expense of speed. The encryption and decryption processes, coupled with longer connection paths through multiple servers, can result in slower internet speeds. For users who prioritize security and privacy above all else, a Traditional VPN is often the preferred choice, despite the potential for reduced performance.


When comparing performance and speed, its important to consider your specific needs and usage patterns. If you are an occasional user who primarily engages in streaming or casual browsing, a Lite VPN may offer the best balance of speed and functionality. On the other hand, if you are handling sensitive information or require a high level of anonymity, the enhanced security features of a Traditional VPN might outweigh the potential slowdown in speed.


Ultimately, the decision between a Lite VPN and a Traditional VPN should be guided by your individual priorities. Both options have their merits, and the right choice depends on whether you value speed and simplicity or security and comprehensive features. By evaluating your needs and weighing the pros and cons, you can select the VPN solution that best aligns with your digital lifestyle.

Cost Effectiveness


In todays digital age, the importance of online privacy and security cannot be overstated. Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) have emerged as essential tools for safeguarding personal information and ensuring secure browsing. However, choosing between a Lite VPN and a Traditional VPN often boils down to cost-effectiveness, which requires an understanding of how each option aligns with ones financial considerations and desired features.


Lite VPNs are designed with simplicity and affordability in mind. They offer basic security features, such as encrypting internet traffic and masking IP addresses, at a lower price point or even for free. These services are particularly appealing to casual users who primarily seek to bypass geographical restrictions or secure their connection on public Wi-Fi networks. The cost-effectiveness of a Lite VPN is evident in its no-frills approach: users pay less, or nothing at all, and in return, they receive essential protection that suits their minimalistic needs. For individuals on a tight budget or those who use VPNs sporadically, Lite VPNs present a financially sensible choice.


On the other hand, Traditional VPNs typically come with a higher price tag due to their extensive range of features and enhanced capabilities. They offer robust encryption, multiple server locations, faster connection speeds, and advanced security protocols. These features cater to users who require comprehensive protection, such as businesses handling sensitive data or individuals in regions with stringent internet censorship. Although the initial cost of a Traditional VPN might seem steep, its cost-effectiveness becomes apparent when considering the level of security and privacy provided. For users who prioritize data protection and require consistent, high-speed access to global content, the investment in a Traditional VPN proves to be worthwhile.


Ultimately, the decision between a Lite VPN and a Traditional VPN hinges on a users specific needs and budget. For occasional users seeking basic security and cost savings, a Lite VPN offers a pragmatic solution. However, for those who need extensive protection and are willing to invest in superior performance, a Traditional VPN provides comprehensive value. By evaluating the cost-effectiveness of each option, users can make an informed choice that aligns with their priorities and financial constraints, ensuring they receive the best possible protection for their online activities.

Security Features and Protocols


In the realm of digital privacy and online security, Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) have emerged as essential tools for safeguarding personal information and maintaining anonymity on the internet. However, as with most technological solutions, VPNs are not one-size-fits-all. Two primary types of VPNs dominate the market: Lite VPNs and Traditional VPNs. A critical factor in choosing between them is understanding their security features and protocols, which play a pivotal role in determining which option is right for you.


Lite VPNs, often favored for their simplicity and speed, are designed to cater to users who need basic security without the complexity and resource demands of more robust solutions. They typically employ lightweight encryption protocols like WireGuard, which is known for its high performance and ease of deployment. Lite VPNs focus on providing fast connection speeds and ease of use, making them an attractive option for casual users who prioritize speed over comprehensive security features. However, this simplicity often means that Lite VPNs may not offer the same level of security and privacy as their traditional counterparts, potentially leaving users vulnerable to more sophisticated cyber threats.


On the other hand, Traditional VPNs are equipped with a broader array of security features and protocols, designed to offer a more comprehensive shield against online threats. These VPNs often use established protocols like OpenVPN or IPsec, known for their robustness and reliability in securing data transmissions. Traditional VPNs provide a more extensive range of security options, including features like multi-hop connections and advanced encryption standards, which ensure that user data remains protected even in the face of determined cyber attacks. This makes them particularly appealing for users who handle sensitive information or require a higher level of anonymity and security.


When deciding between a Lite VPN and a Traditional VPN, it is crucial to consider your specific needs and use cases. If your primary concern is speed and you engage in low-risk online activities, a Lite VPN might suffice. However, if your online activities involve handling sensitive data or you require advanced privacy measures, a Traditional VPN with its more robust security protocols would likely be the better choice.


In conclusion, both Lite VPNs and Traditional VPNs have their place in the digital security landscape. The decision between the two should be guided by a careful assessment of your personal security needs, the level of protection required, and the specific features offered by each type of VPN. By understanding the security features and protocols inherent to each option, you can make an informed choice that aligns with your online safety priorities.

User Experience and Accessibility


In the digital age, where online privacy and security are of utmost importance, Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) have become an essential tool for many internet users. However, the choice between a Lite VPN and a Traditional VPN can significantly impact your user experience and accessibility. Understanding the differences between these two options is crucial in determining which one is right for you.


A Traditional VPN is known for its robust security features, offering comprehensive encryption that ensures your internet activities remain private and secure. It routes your internet traffic through a secure server, masking your IP address and protecting your data from potential hackers and surveillance. This type of VPN is ideal for users who prioritize maximum security and privacy, such as those handling sensitive information or accessing restricted content.


However, the enhanced security of a Traditional VPN can come with a trade-off in terms of user experience. Traditional VPNs may slow down your internet connection due to the complex encryption processes they employ. This can be a significant drawback for users who rely on fast internet speeds for streaming, gaming, or other high-bandwidth activities. Additionally, setting up and configuring a Traditional VPN can be a daunting task for those who are not tech-savvy, potentially limiting its accessibility for some users.


On the other hand, Lite VPNs offer a more streamlined user experience. They are designed to be lightweight and easy to use, often requiring minimal setup and configuration. This makes them more accessible to a broader audience, including individuals who may be new to VPN technology. Lite VPNs typically provide faster connection speeds, as they use less complex encryption methods. This can be particularly advantageous for users who value speed and ease of use over top-tier security.


However, the simplicity and speed of Lite VPNs often come at the expense of comprehensive security features. While they still offer a basic level of encryption and privacy protection, they may not be suitable for users who require the highest level of security. Therefore, if youre someone who handles sensitive data or frequently accesses geo-restricted content, a Lite VPN might not meet your security needs.


Ultimately, the decision between a Lite VPN and a Traditional VPN depends on your specific needs and priorities. If you prioritize enhanced security and privacy, and dont mind a potential decrease in internet speed, a Traditional VPN is likely the better choice. Conversely, if you value speed, ease of use, and accessibility, and your online activities dont require the highest security levels, a Lite VPN may be more suitable.


In conclusion, both Lite VPNs and Traditional VPNs offer distinct advantages and disadvantages in terms of user experience and accessibility. By carefully considering your internet usage habits and security requirements, you can make an informed decision about which type of VPN is right for you. Whether you choose the robust security of a Traditional VPN or the convenience of a Lite VPN, both options can significantly enhance your online privacy and security.

 

Virtual private network (VPN) is a network architecture for virtually extending a private network (i.e. any computer network which is not the public Internet) across one or multiple other networks which are either untrusted (as they are not controlled by the entity aiming to implement the VPN) or need to be isolated (thus making the lower network invisible or not directly usable).[1]

A VPN can extend access to a private network to users who do not have direct access to it, such as an office network allowing secure access from off-site over the Internet.[2] This is achieved by creating a link between computing devices and computer networks by the use of network tunneling protocols.

It is possible to make a VPN secure to use on top of insecure communication medium (such as the public internet) by choosing a tunneling protocol that implements encryption. This kind of VPN implementation has the benefit of reduced costs and greater flexibility, with respect to dedicated communication lines, for remote workers.[3]

The term VPN is also used to refer to VPN services which sell access to their own private networks for internet access by connecting their customers using VPN tunneling protocols.

Motivation

[edit]

The goal of a virtual private network is to allow network hosts to exchange network messages across another network to access private content, as if they were part of the same network. This is done in a way that makes crossing the intermediate network transparent to network applications. Users of a network connectivity service may consider such an intermediate network to be untrusted, since it is controlled by a third-party, and might prefer a VPN implemented via protocols that protect the privacy of their communication.

In the case of a Provider-provisioned VPN, the goal is not to protect against untrusted networks, but to isolate parts of the provider's own network infrastructure in virtual segments, in ways that make the contents of each segment private with respect to the others. This situation makes many other tunneling protocols suitable for building PPVPNs, even with weak or no security features (like in VLAN).

VPN general working

[edit]

How a VPN works depends on which technologies and protocols the VPN is built upon. A tunneling protocol is used to transfer the network messages from one side to the other. The goal is to take network messages from applications on one side of the tunnel and replay them on the other side. Applications do not need to be modified to let their messages pass through the VPN, because the virtual network or link is made available to the OS.

Applications that do implement tunneling or proxying features for themselves without making such features available as a network interface, are not to be considered VPN implementations but may achieve the same or similar end-user goal of exchanging private contents with a remote network.

VPN topology configurations

[edit]
VPN classification tree based on the topology first, then on the technology used
VPN connectivity overview, showing intranet site-to-site and remote-work configurations used together

Virtual private networks configurations can be classified depending on the purpose of the virtual extension, which makes different tunneling strategies appropriate for different topologies:

Remote access
A host-to-network configuration is analogous to joining one or more computers to a network to which they cannot be directly connected. This type of extension provides that computer access to local area network of a remote site, or any wider enterprise networks, such as an intranet. Each computer is in charge of activating its own tunnel towards the network it wants to join. The joined network is only aware of a single remote host for each tunnel. This may be employed for remote workers, or to enable people accessing their private home or company resources without exposing them on the public Internet. Remote access tunnels can be either on-demand or always-on. Because the remote host location is usually unknown to the central network until the former tries to reach it, proper implementations of this configuration require the remote host to initiate the communication towards the central network it is accessing.
Site-to-site
A site-to-site configuration connects two networks. This configuration expands a network across geographically disparate locations. Tunneling is only done between gateway devices located at each network location. These devices then make the tunnel available to other local network hosts that aim to reach any host on the other side. This is useful to keep sites connected to each other in a stable manner, like office networks to their headquarters or datacenter. In this case, any side may be configured to initiate the communication as long as it knows how to reach the other.

In the context of site-to-site configurations, the terms intranet and extranet are used to describe two different use cases.[4] An intranet site-to-site VPN describes a configuration where the sites connected by the VPN belong to the same organization, whereas an extranet site-to-site VPN joins sites belonging to multiple organizations.

Typically, individuals interact with remote access VPNs, whereas businesses tend to make use of site-to-site connections for business-to-business, cloud computing, and branch office scenarios. However, these technologies are not mutually exclusive and, in a significantly complex business network, may be combined.

Apart from the general topology configuration, a VPN may also be characterized by:

  • the tunneling protocol used to tunnel the traffic.
  • the tunnel's termination point location, e.g., on the customer edge or network-provider edge.
  • the security features provided.
  • the OSI layer they present to the connecting network, such as Layer 2 link/circuit or Layer 3 network connectivity.
  • the number of simultaneous allowed tunnels.
  • the relationship between the actor implementing the VPN and the network infrastructure owner/provider, and whether the former trusts the medium of the former or not.

A variety of VPN technics exist to adapt to the above characteristics, each providing different network tunneling capabilities and different security model coverage or interpretation.

VPN native and third-party support

[edit]

Operating systems vendors and developers do typically offer native support to a selection of VPN protocols which is subject to change over the years, as some have been proven to be unsecure with respect to modern requirements and expectations, and some others emerged.

VPN support in consumer operating systems

[edit]

Desktop, smartphone and other end-user device operating systems do usually support configuring remote access VPN from their graphical or command-line tools.[5][6][7] However, due to the variety of, often non standard, VPN protocols there exists many third-party applications that implement additional protocols not yet or no more natively supported by the OS.

For instance, Android lacked native IPsec IKEv2 support until version 11,[8] and people needed to install third-party apps in order to connect that kind of VPNs, while Microsoft Windows, BlackBerry OS and others got it supported in the past.

Conversely, Windows does not support plain IPsec IKEv1 remote access native VPN configuration (commonly used by Cisco and Fritz!Box VPN solutions) which makes the use of third-party applications mandatory for people and companies relying on such VPN protocol.

VPN support in network devices

[edit]

Network appliances, such as firewalls, do often include VPN gateway functionality for either remote access or site-to-site configurations. Their administration interfaces do often facilitate setting up virtual private networks with a selection of supported protocols which have been integrated for an easy out-of-box setup.

In some cases, like in the open source operating systems devoted to firewalls and network devices (like OpenWrt, IPFire, PfSense or OPNsense) it is possible to add support for additional VPN protocols by installing missing software components or third-party apps.

Similarly, it is possible to get additional VPN configurations working, even if the OS does not facilitate the setup of that particular configuration, by manually editing internal configurations of by modifying the open source code of the OS itself. For instance, pfSense does not support remote access VPN configurations through its user interface where the OS runs on the remote host, while provides comprehensive support for configuring it as the central VPN gateway of such remote-access configuration scenario.

Otherwise, commercial appliances with VPN features based on proprietary hardware/software platforms, usually support a consistent VPN protocol across their products but do not open up for customizations outside the use cases they intended to implement. This is often the case for appliances that rely on hardware acceleration of VPNs to provide higher throughput or support a larger amount of simultaneously connected users.

Security mechanisms

[edit]

Whenever a VPN is intended to virtually extend a private network over a third-party untrusted medium, it is desirable that the chosen protocols match the following security model:

VPN are not intended to make connecting users anonymous or unidentifiable from the untrusted medium network provider perspective. If the VPN makes use of protocols that do provide those confidentiality features, their usage can increase user privacy by making the untrusted medium owner unable to access the private data exchanged across the VPN.

Authentication

[edit]

In order to prevent unauthorized users from accessing the VPN, most protocols can be implemented in ways that also enable authentication of connecting parties. This secures the joined remote network confidentiality, integrity and availability.

Tunnel endpoints can be authenticated in various ways during the VPN access initiation. Authentication can happen immediately on VPN initiation (e.g. by simple whitelisting of endpoint IP address), or very lately after actual tunnels are already active (e.g. with a web captive portal).

Remote-access VPNs, which are typically user-initiated, may use passwords, biometrics, two-factor authentication, or other cryptographic methods. People initiating this kind of VPN from unknown arbitrary network locations are also called "road-warriors". In such cases, it is not possible to use originating network properties (e.g. IP addresses) as secure authentication factors, and stronger methods are needed.

Site-to-site VPNs often use passwords (pre-shared keys) or digital certificates. Depending on the VPN protocol, they may store the key to allow the VPN tunnel to establish automatically, without intervention from the administrator.

VPN protocols to highlight

[edit]
The life cycle phases of an IPSec tunnel in a virtual private network

A virtual private network is based on a tunneling protocol, and may be possibly combined with other network or application protocols providing extra capabilities and different security model coverage.

  • Internet Protocol Security (IPsec) was initially developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) for IPv6, and was required in all standards-compliant implementations of IPv6 before RFC 6434 made it only a recommendation.[9] This standards-based security protocol is also widely used with IPv4. Its design meets most security goals: availability, integrity, and confidentiality. IPsec uses encryption, encapsulating an IP packet inside an IPsec packet. De-encapsulation happens at the end of the tunnel, where the original IP packet is decrypted and forwarded to its intended destination. IPsec tunnels are set up by Internet Key Exchange (IKE) protocol. IPsec tunnels made with IKE version 1 (also known as IKEv1 tunnels, or often just "IPsec tunnels") can be used alone to provide VPN, but have been often combined to the Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol (L2TP). Their combination made possible to reuse existing L2TP-related implementations for more flexible authentication features (e.g. Xauth), desirable for remote-access configurations. IKE version 2, which was created by Microsoft and Cisco, can be used alone to provide IPsec VPN functionality. Its primary advantages are the native support for authenticating via the Extensible Authentication Protocol (EAP) and that the tunnel can be seamlessly restored when the IP address of the associated host is changing, which is typical of a roaming mobile device, whether on 3G or 4G LTE networks. IPsec is also often supported by network hardware accelerators,[10] which makes IPsec VPN desirable for low-power scenarios, like always-on remote access VPN configurations.[11][12]
  • Transport Layer Security (SSL/TLS) can tunnel an entire network's traffic (as it does in the OpenVPN project and SoftEther VPN project[13]) or secure an individual connection. A number of vendors provide remote-access VPN capabilities through TLS. A VPN based on TLS can connect from locations where the usual TLS web navigation (HTTPS) is supported without special extra configurations,
  • Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) – used in Cisco AnyConnect VPN and in OpenConnect VPN[14] to solve the issues TLS has with tunneling over TCP (SSL/TLS are TCP-based, and tunneling TCP over TCP can lead to big delays and connection aborts[15]).
  • Microsoft Point-to-Point Encryption (MPPE) works with the Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol and in several compatible implementations on other platforms.
  • Microsoft Secure Socket Tunneling Protocol (SSTP) tunnels Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) or Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol traffic through an SSL/TLS channel (SSTP was introduced in Windows Server 2008 and in Windows Vista Service Pack 1).
  • Multi Path Virtual Private Network (MPVPN). Ragula Systems Development Company owns the registered trademark "MPVPN".[relevant?][16]
  • Secure Shell (SSH) VPN – OpenSSH offers VPN tunneling (distinct from port forwarding) to secure[ambiguous] remote connections to a network, inter-network links, and remote systems. OpenSSH server provides a limited number of concurrent tunnels. The VPN feature itself does not support personal authentication.[17] SSH is more often used to remotely connect to machines or networks instead of a site to site VPN connection.
  • WireGuard is a protocol. In 2020, WireGuard support was added to both the Linux[18] and Android[19] kernels, opening it up to adoption by VPN providers. By default, WireGuard utilizes the Curve25519 protocol for key exchange and ChaCha20-Poly1305 for encryption and message authentication, but also includes the ability to pre-share a symmetric key between the client and server.[20]
  • OpenVPN is a free and open-source VPN protocol based on the TLS protocol. It supports perfect forward-secrecy, and most modern secure cipher suites, like AES, Serpent, TwoFish, etc. It is currently[may be outdated as of March 2023] being developed and updated by OpenVPN Inc., a non-profit providing secure VPN technologies.
  • Crypto IP Encapsulation (CIPE) is a free and open-source VPN implementation for tunneling IPv4 packets over UDP via encapsulation.[21] CIPE was developed for Linux operating systems by Olaf Titz, with a Windows port implemented by Damion K. Wilson.[22] Development for CIPE ended in 2002.[23]

Trusted delivery networks

[edit]

Trusted VPNs do not use cryptographic tunneling; instead, they rely on the security of a single provider's network to protect the traffic.[24]

From a security standpoint, a VPN must either trust the underlying delivery network or enforce security with a mechanism in the VPN itself. Unless the trusted delivery network runs among physically secure sites only, both trusted and secure models need an authentication mechanism for users to gain access to the VPN.[citation needed]

VPNs in mobile environments

[edit]

Mobile virtual private networks are used in settings where an endpoint of the VPN is not fixed to a single IP address, but instead roams across various networks such as data networks from cellular carriers or between multiple Wi-Fi access points without dropping the secure VPN session or losing application sessions.[28] Mobile VPNs are widely used in public safety where they give law-enforcement officers access to applications such as computer-assisted dispatch and criminal databases,[29] and in other organizations with similar requirements such as field service management and healthcare.[30][need quotation to verify]

Networking limitations

[edit]

A limitation of traditional VPNs is that they are point-to-point connections and do not tend to support broadcast domains; therefore, communication, software, and networking, which are based on layer 2 and broadcast packets, such as NetBIOS used in Windows networking, may not be fully supported as on a local area network. Variants on VPN such as Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) and layer 2 tunneling protocols are designed to overcome this limitation.[31]

 

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ "virtual private network". NIST Computer Security Resource Center Glossary. Archived from the original on 2 January 2023. Retrieved 2 January 2023.
  2. ^ "What Is a VPN? - Virtual Private Network". Cisco. Archived from the original on 31 December 2021. Retrieved 5 September 2021.
  3. ^ Mason, Andrew G. (2002). Cisco Secure Virtual Private Network. Cisco Press. p. 7. ISBN 9781587050336.
  4. ^ RFC 3809 - Generic Requirements for Provider Provisioned Virtual Private Networks. sec. 1.1. doi:10.17487/RFC3809. RFC 3809.
  5. ^ "Connect to a VPN in Windows - Microsoft Support". support.microsoft.com. Retrieved 11 July 2024.
  6. ^ "Connect to a virtual private network (VPN) on Android". Retrieved 11 July 2024.
  7. ^ "VPN settings overview for Apple devices". Apple Support. Retrieved 11 July 2024.
  8. ^ "IPsec/IKEv2 Library". Android Open Source Project. Retrieved 11 July 2024.
  9. ^ RFC 6434, "IPv6 Node Requirements", E. Jankiewicz, J. Loughney, T. Narten (December 2011)
  10. ^ "Security for VPNs with IPsec Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 15S - VPN Acceleration Module [Support]". Cisco. Retrieved 9 July 2024.
  11. ^ "VPN overview for Apple device deployment". Apple Support. Retrieved 9 July 2024.
  12. ^ "About Always On VPN for Windows Server Remote Access". learn.microsoft.com. 22 May 2023. Retrieved 9 July 2024.
  13. ^ "1. Ultimate Powerful VPN Connectivity". www.softether.org. SoftEther VPN Project. Archived from the original on 8 October 2022. Retrieved 8 October 2022.
  14. ^ "OpenConnect". Archived from the original on 29 June 2022. Retrieved 8 April 2013. OpenConnect is a client for Cisco's AnyConnect SSL VPN [...] OpenConnect is not officially supported by, or associated in any way with, Cisco Systems. It just happens to interoperate with their equipment.
  15. ^ "Why TCP Over TCP Is A Bad Idea". sites.inka.de. Archived from the original on 6 March 2015. Retrieved 24 October 2018.
  16. ^ "Trademark Status & Document Retrieval". tarr.uspto.gov. Archived from the original on 21 March 2012. Retrieved 8 October 2022.
  17. ^ "ssh(1) – OpenBSD manual pages". man.openbsd.org. Archived from the original on 5 July 2022. Retrieved 4 February 2018.
  18. ^ Salter, Jim (30 March 2020). "WireGuard VPN makes it to 1.0.0—and into the next Linux kernel". Ars Technica. Archived from the original on 31 March 2020. Retrieved 30 June 2020.
  19. ^ "Diff - 99761f1eac33d14a4b1613ae4b7076f41cb2df94^! - kernel/common - Git at Google". android.googlesource.com. Archived from the original on 29 June 2022. Retrieved 30 June 2020.
  20. ^ Younglove, R. (December 2000). "Virtual private networks - how they work". Computing & Control Engineering Journal. 11 (6): 260–262. doi:10.1049/cce:20000602 (inactive 7 December 2024). ISSN 0956-3385.cite journal: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of December 2024 (link)[dead link]
    • Benjamin Dowling, and Kenneth G. Paterson (12 June 2018). "A cryptographic analysis of the WireGuard protocol". International Conference on Applied Cryptography and Network Security. ISBN 978-3-319-93386-3.
  21. ^ Fuller, Johnray; Ha, John (2002). Red Hat Linux 9: Red Hat Linux Security Guide (PDF). United States: Red Hat, Inc. pp. 48–53. Archived (PDF) from the original on 14 October 2022. Retrieved 8 September 2022.
  22. ^ Titz, Olaf (20 December 2011). "CIPE - Crypto IP Encapsulation". CIPE - Crypto IP Encapsulation. Archived from the original on 18 May 2022. Retrieved 8 September 2022.
  23. ^ Titz, Olaf (2 April 2013). "CIPE - encrypted IP in UDP tunneling". SourceForge. Archived from the original on 8 September 2022. Retrieved 8 September 2022.
  24. ^ Cisco Systems, Inc. (2004). Internetworking Technologies Handbook. Networking Technology Series (4 ed.). Cisco Press. p. 233. ISBN 9781587051197. Retrieved 15 February 2013. [...] VPNs using dedicated circuits, such as Frame Relay [...] are sometimes called trusted VPNs, because customers trust that the network facilities operated by the service providers will not be compromised.
  25. ^ Layer Two Tunneling Protocol "L2TP" Archived 30 June 2022 at the Wayback Machine, RFC 2661, W. Townsley et al., August 1999
  26. ^ IP Based Virtual Private Networks Archived 9 July 2022 at the Wayback Machine, RFC 2341, A. Valencia et al., May 1998
  27. ^ Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol (PPTP) Archived 2 July 2022 at the Wayback Machine, RFC 2637, K. Hamzeh et al., July 1999
  28. ^ Phifer, Lisa. "Mobile VPN: Closing the Gap" Archived 6 July 2020 at the Wayback Machine, SearchMobileComputing.com, 16 July 2006.
  29. ^ Willett, Andy. "Solving the Computing Challenges of Mobile Officers" Archived 12 April 2020 at the Wayback Machine, www.officer.com, May, 2006.
  30. ^ Cheng, Roger. "Lost Connections" Archived 28 March 2018 at the Wayback Machine, The Wall Street Journal, 11 December 2007.
  31. ^ Sowells, Julia (7 August 2017). "Virtual Private Network (VPN) : What VPN Is And How It Works". Hackercombat. Archived from the original on 17 June 2022. Retrieved 7 November 2021.

Further reading

[edit]