You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The feature Shadowsocks (with no Forward Secrecy, etc.) is deprecated, not recommended for using and might be removed. Please migrate to VLESS Encryption as soon as possible.
In Iran, our Iranian IPs get inaccessible for non-iranian IPs when the firewall finds out that the IP address is being used for a VPN server. It happens much more frequently when using RAW transportation (even with HTTP Obfuscation) compared to when using protocols like Shadowsocks, or VLESS+XHTTP or when securing using REALITY. I just wanted to ask do you think weather or not encrypted VLESS would behave similarly to Shadowsocks in this case or not, as the warning suggests using it instead?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Hi guys. I saw this XRAY warning the other day:
In Iran, our Iranian IPs get inaccessible for non-iranian IPs when the firewall finds out that the IP address is being used for a VPN server. It happens much more frequently when using RAW transportation (even with HTTP Obfuscation) compared to when using protocols like Shadowsocks, or VLESS+XHTTP or when securing using REALITY. I just wanted to ask do you think weather or not encrypted VLESS would behave similarly to Shadowsocks in this case or not, as the warning suggests using it instead?
All reactions