The Enterprise and WireGuard

The Enterprise and WireGuard

WireGuard® at its core is a lightweight, low code, VPN tunneling protocol that optimizes for speed, security and ease of configuration. However, extended business functions needed for enterprise usage are left out of its code base by design. This non-opinionated approach allows third parties to develop novel methods that best fit enterprise needs and styles.

Examples of Enterprise needs are:

  • Key (re)generation and distribution for both human users and machine-to-machine networks
  • RESTful API for integration to in-house systems and external services
  • Uniform access to encrypted tunneling via regional or global clusters
  • Dynamic routing so devices on the WireGuard network learn about network paths as they come and go
  • Failover support allowing clients to migrate servers in the event of maintenance or outages
  • Integration to security platforms (Firewalls, WAFs, IDS/IPS)
  • Integration to other “tunneled” paths (IPsec, GRE, VXLAN, cloud direct connects, etc..)
  • Integration to “legacy” monitoring tools like SNMP
  • Integration to “modern” monitoring tools like Datadog and Sumologic
  • Integration to legacy authentication (Active Directory)
  • Integration to modern authentication (OAuth / OpenID, MFA, etc..)
  • AND more!

Cohesive is working to make the WireGuard protocol a first order citizen in our VNS3 Network Platform with a focus on many of these extended capabilities.

Enterprises will need methods to securely store and distribute keys to human and machines. Authenticated REST APIs allow automation frameworks to tag and place keys where needed in a distributed computing environment. Self-service web portals give end users access to allocated keys for their various devices. Administrators and intrusion detection systems need the ability to revoke keys when compromise occurs.

Not all tunneling systems and their keys are the same. Many companies employ encrypted overlay networks, in cloud and between their compute nodes in order to satisfy regulatory requirements and gain network visibility. For automated machine-to-machine communications, public/private key pairs are all that is required, whereas with “people VPN” scenarios added authentication factors are needed.

In the dynamic world of cloud networking and remote work, private networks are now fluid, meaning that network address ranges are added and removed, as new networks and subnets come on line or are decommissioned. In order for systems to communicate they need dynamic route updates providing up-to-date paths through interconnected transit networks.

These encrypted tunneling systems are used to take the enterprise, its customer and partners to, through, and across clouds. This requires the WireGuard feature called “Allowed IPs” that acts as both ACL and route directives to be integrated. In Enterprise WireGuard use-cases, the “Allowed IPs” don’t come from a configuration file, they will be dynamically and seamlessly integrated to the broader systems routing and ACL policies. communications in the enterprise. Companies need the ability to filter and direct traffic at ingress and egress points in cloud networks.

WireGuard is fast becoming an essential operating system and developer tool, and Cohesive Networks believes it’s on its way to being an essential building block for creating robust, enterprise-ready network solutions.

“WireGuard” and the “WireGuard” logo are registered trademarks of Jason A. Donenfeld.

WireGuard: A Quick Overview

WireGuard: A Quick Overview

Image courtesy of

WireGuard® is a new communication protocol that implements encrypted virtual private networks (VPN). It endeavors to provide network agility, advanced security, performance, and configuration simplicity. Back in 2017 Jason A. Donenfeld, a security researcher and Linux kernel developer, was looking for a stealthy traffic tunneling solution for use in penetration testing jobs. In an interview on the Security. Cryptography. Whatever. podcast, Donenfeld explains that while he was “familiar with OpenVPN and IPSec” he was well aware of the bugs these solutions carried with them. Thus, he set out to create something new for himself that would not suffer from historical technical debt.

IPSec, one of the major VPN options available today, was born in 1992 with the Internet Engineering Task Force’s formation of the IP Security Working group, and was standardized in 1995 under RFC-1825 and RFC-1827. IPSec has always required a tremendous amount of configuration unique to the hardware and software environments it will then connect. The encryption, key exchange, and authentication algorithms that it supports are overly broad, in order to support legacy equipment. The key exchange mechanism can be prone to rekeying issues, causing stability problems. This is not to say that IPSec should be avoided, but to point to the non-triviality of its implementation. If you consider using IPSec as a vehicle for remote worker VPN connections (“people VPN” or “road warrior VPN”), there are security concerns as simple as an “aggressive mode” sending a hash of pre-shared keys in plain text.

Another option, OpenVPN, was initially released in 2001 by James Yonan. It uses Secure Socket Layer (SSL) and Transport Layer Security (TLS) to provide encryption. OpenVPN is currently the most widely used VPN protocol on the planet, to the extent that some might consider it the backbone of modern online security. Along with trusted encryption, OpenVPN also supports a wide range of algorithms for encryption and authentication, hashing, and key derivation, making it highly adaptable to different deployments. It also uses certificates for identification and encryption and it can operate on UDP or TCP.

This brings us back to the steady emergence of WireGuard. In January of 2020 Linus Torvalds merged David Miller’s “net-next” tree into the Linux kernel, bringing WireGuard into the mainline Linux kernel tree. WireGuard was written to be efficient and easily readable; it is comprised of around 4,000 lines of code, which is much fewer lines of code than OpenVPN relies on. Among other benefits, this smaller size makes WireGuard auditable in an afternoon (or so) and the condensed code significantly reduces the attack surface. The goal is to keep WireGuard slimmed down to its basic operational function; a simplified and performant VPN. It is left to third parties to extend it to meet various functional business requirements.

While IPSec and OpenVPN provide a plethora of algorithmic options, WireGuard limits the need for user choice and customization in favor of fast, modern cryptographic primitives that don’t rely on hardware accelerators. This greatly removes the possibility of user miscalculation and thus insecure or improper deployments. Many connectivity vulnerabilities are caused by the combination of primitives, not always the primitives themselves. WireGuard endeavors to combine known, secure, and performant primitives, and allows you to negotiate protocol versions to easily address future vulnerabilities.

WireGuard operates much like OpenSSH in terms of public and private keys. Peers identify themselves with a unique public keys which are is used to establish their IP inside of the tunnel. WireGuard calls this concept “cryptokey routing”. This simplification of tunnel configuration is a major advantage of WireGuard. Performance is another major factor of WireGuard’s appeal. OpenVPN adds about 20% data overhead while IPSec adds around 10%, but WireGuard uses a mere 4% more data than an unencrypted connection. Most tests even show WireGuard performing around twice as fast as OpenVPN, with WireGuard operating near to or close to line speed. Another key factor to the speed of connectivity is where WireGuard operates in the operating system. On Linux, WireGuard operates in kernel space, where packets are processed at a much faster rate. However, on Windows this is not the case, so the WireGuard group has developed a very simple and minimal TUN driver, Wintun, for the Windows kernel that shuttles packets to the Windows User Space. We can probably expect WireGuardNT (LINK) to move into the Windows kernel space in the future.

Back to the cryptokey routing table. The “cryptokey routing” concept developed by WireGuard allows changes to external source IPs to be picked up and propagated quickly and efficiency. Whether you are a roaming client that is switching between cellular and wifi, or a client that needs to ‘fail over’ to a backup server, the cryptokey routing table gets updated in mere seconds with the new IPs of the tunnel. In comparison, OpenVPN can take 30 seconds to reestablish new IP connections, which is only slightly slower than the time it takes IPSec connections using BGP routing to reestablish similar connections. The WireGuard protocol provides additional security in that it does not respond to packets from non peers nor unauthenticated packets, leaving WireGuard mostly invisible to non-peers.

In conclusion, it appears WireGuard aims to keep its code base small, be easy to implement and audit, all while having blazingly fast performance using state-of-the-art cryptography.

“WireGuard” and the “WireGuard” logo are registered trademarks of Jason A. Donenfeld.

News Roundup: Week of Feb 21, 2022

News Roundup: Week of Feb 21, 2022

U.S. Cyber Officials Issue Official Warning Against Potential Russian Cyber Attacks

During a call this Monday, FBI and DHS cyber officials urged government agencies “to look out for signs of Russian activity on their networks” as a result of the evolving Ukraine crisis. According to Yahoo: “federal officials also urged those on the call to dramatically lower their threshold for reporting suspicious activity.” Citing “an uptick in Russian scanning of U.S. law enforcement networks” as well as “in Russian disinformation and misinformation about Ukraine,” cyber officials urge increased care and caution with links and communications as the crisis progresses.

IBM Opens Cyber Security Hub in India

IBM recently announced the opening of their first IBM Security Command Center in the Asia Pacific region. The center hopes to provide a cybersecurity incident response plan for enterprise customers with deployments in the region, as well as “a fully immersive, interactive, and experiential learning facility.” IBM plans to use simulations and experiential training to help enterprises protect themselves from cyberattacks. IBM promises that by co-locating this training center with their X-Force Command Center, IBM’s Security Operations Center, both live practice and training for cyber security precautions will benefit immensely.

Microsoft Brings Cloud Security to GCP

Yesterday Microsoft announced the release of Microsoft Defender for Cloud for Google Cloud Platform, making Microsoft the first major cloud provider to offer security solutions in all major cloud platforms. The offering from Microsoft boasts Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) and Cloud Workload Protection (CWP) across both containers and servers. According to the release, GCP deployments of Microsoft Defender for Cloud will come “with out-of-box recommendations that allow you to configure GCP environments in line with key security standards like the Center for Internet Security (CIS).” Microsoft is also emphasizing the necessity of Zero Trust Management and event log management in cloud environments with two more ‘upgraded’ cloud security offerings.

Distributed Hybrid MultiCloud Mesh with VNS3 and LNKe

Distributed Hybrid MultiCloud Mesh with VNS3 and LNKe

As cloud adoption continues to ramp up in 2022, with Gartner projecting another 21.7% growth in cloud spend this year, companies are maturing beyond their initial workload migrations to single cloud vendors. Whether to create resiliency due to the now not so uncommon major outages we have seen in the past few years, to tailor their many application environments to changing business requirements, or to migrate to new cloud vendors whose offering is the best fit. However, in order to realize these opportunities, companies need a consistent network layer that is uncoupled from any one cloud vendors specific dependancies. No matter which cloud you choose, achieving this goal requires utilizing third party network solutions. Such a solution should ideally facilitate connectivity to data-centers, remote users, and IOT devices as well.

Cohesive Networks VNS3 cloud edge security controllers can create the backbone across all of your public cloud vendors in an easy to manage and secure mesh, with LNKe connecting all of your virtual private networks. This gives you a fully transitive network across all of your cloud real estate, running at performative speeds with built in failover and self healing mesh capabilities. Granular IPSec cloud edge configurations allow you to connect corporate data centers, partner networks and vendor access, regardless of their hardware. Policy enforcement is consistent across the network and has been simplified for ease of management. With our comprehensive firewall you can easily define people, groups and network objects to allow your remote workforce to securely connect at the edge closest to their physical location. In short, with VNS3 and LNKe, you can create a full network mesh consistent with your needs that can grow to anywhere that you need to be and scale with your deploments.

Please reach out to the Cohesive Networks sales and solutions team at to further the discussion with any interests that you may have. We are always happy to help.

News Roundup: Week of Feb 21, 2022

News Roundup: Week of Dec 26, 2021

Could Continuing AWS Outages Give Rise to Distributed Cloud Deployments?

Widespread disruption of high-use internet services was recently experienced as a result of the third AWS outage in the span of a month. AWS reported this latest disruption was caused by “a power outage at a data center in Northern Virginia” which saw giants like Hulu and Slack offline for about two and a half hours. A recent article from The Washington Post suggests that having a cloud deployment with a singular, critical point of failure creates opportunities for widespread outages, in a world where distributed cloud deployments can offer you some protection from these outages. As “the cloud’s increasing intricacy and demands” continue to increase, and companies continue to migrate and develop in the cloud, the potential for outages caused by the “over-centralization” of infrastructure into heavily-used AWS regions also increases.

Azure App Service Insecurity Exposing Source Code Since 2017

A recently discovered insecurity in the Azure App Service has “exposed the source code of applications written in PHP, Python, Ruby, and Node” and has been prevalent since September 2017. SC Magazine purports that this security flaw was first widely reported to the public by The Wiz on Oct. 7, 2021, and Microsoft has since updated it’s security recommendations document and mitigated the default behavior that caused this issue. Further research suggests that this vulnerability was likely not a well-kept secret and would have been widely exploited during the purported four year window of this vulnerability. We recommend double-checking your deployments against these new recommendations to ensure that your source code isn’t vulnerable.

Security Attacks Likely to Continue to Increase in 2022

2020 and 2021 have been marred by an increase in the commonality and sophistication of security attacks on companies as we all navigate the uncharted waters of remote work, and address the new connectivity and security concerns that have surfaced as a result of this necessary transition. A recent article from Bloomberg law suggest that some of the most damaging attacks have targeted backbone systems and solutions, such as the Microsoft Exchange software attacks that affected many companies in 2021. Alarmingly, many of the “exploits used in the first quarter of 2021 are still being used today” which only serves to create added pressure on both the solutions providers and companies that build critical systems upon such backbones solutions. These attacks are complemented by more ‘traditional’ phishing attacks, “which remains one of the highest-volume types of vulnerabilities” across all business sectors. Having proper security procedures and communication channels in place is more important than ever, and the criticality of such considerations will only increase as we move into 2022.

JEDI Becomes JWCC With Decision Target of Q3 2022

In the wake of four years of legal challenges and congressional inquiries, The JEDI contract has been replaced with a new framework, the Joint Warfighter Cloud Compatibility (JWCC), “from which to deliver commercial cloud services to Defense personnel.” The Pentagon “issued formal solicitations for JWCC” to AWS, Microsoft, Google, and Oracle, effectively leveling the playing field for the biggest US cloud providers. According to Nextgov “The Pentagon plans to make JWCC awards in the third quarter of fiscal 2022” which could bring some interesting infrastructure developments from these cloud providers.
VNS3 LNKe: Creating Cloud-Agnostic Transitive Networks Without a lot of Fuss

VNS3 LNKe: Creating Cloud-Agnostic Transitive Networks Without a lot of Fuss

Cohesive Networks has been helping our customers build robust transit networks on public cloud infrastructure since our early days. Doing so on VNS3 technology gives you secure and observable methods consistent across cloud providers and other virtualization platforms. Up until recently we achieved this by creating site to site IPSec tunnels into our federated mesh backbone. This approach, while robust due to BGP failover capabilities, adds quite a lot of complexity. Each of these connections have unique peering addresses and autonomous system numbers (ASN), as well as peer access lists to configure and manage. Which brings us to our new offering, the VNS3 LNKe controller. LNKe controllers are simple to set up while still providing robust failover capabilities.

The VNS3 LNKe controller is one of Cohesive Networks latest offerings. It’s been designed to provide a low cost, easy to deploy, method of connecting your private cloud networks, regardless of the provider. Let’s take a look at the mechanics of it.

VNS3 can be deployed in a peered mesh topology, where by all of the members of the mesh exchange connection and routing information with all of the other members of the mesh across encrypted peering links. These mesh peers can be situated in any cloud provider and in any region. This is the hub in your typical hub and spoke model. The difference being that VNS3 hub, or mesh, components can exist in many different locations, while still being aware of all of the other components. Extending the hub
simply entails adding new peers. This hub can be as little as one or two VNS3 controllers to many tens of controllers spanning across your cloud vendors regions. Within this mesh you have full visibility and attestability of network flows.

    Now to connect your various networks into the mesh so as to facilitate your transitive network. LNKe is a light weight variant, thats has been designed to work with the encrypted overlay networking capabilities of VNS3. It uses the cryptographic key architecture to create a tunnel from the LNKe controller to the closest mesh controller. This link can be established through a VPC peering link between the connecting VPC or over public IP. You simply have to deploy the LNKe controller into the connecting VPC and push the VNS3 client pack to it. This gives it a unique overlay address that the hub mesh is aware of.

    The LNKe can be configured to have failover hub members that it will connect to should any failure occur. On the hub members that it is configured to connect to we then create route entries for the LNKe’s network. This route is pointed at the overlay IP that has been associated with the LNKe controller. While these are effectively static entries, VNS3 will only ever enable the one that is actively connected to. We call this dynamic static routing.

    On the connected VPC you can set your subnet route of to point to the LNKe controller, since LNKe can also serve duty as your NAT gateway. In this way any traffic that is bound for other connected networks will traverse into the hub, where as non transit network traffic can get out as needed.

    This solution gives you a lot of flexibility in managing your network connections. You have full firewall capabilities to restrict and shape traffic. You can transform traffic should you have overlapping CIDRs. You can combine other connections into the mesh such as remote workforces or data center connectivity. You can inject network function virtualization like NIDS and WAF. You end up with a network control plane that works the same across all cloud providers that is cost effective and easy to deploy and mange.