this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
107 points (99.1% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54424 readers
333 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
As others have said, just use qBit. It’s feature-rich and supports network interface binding. Simply bind it to your VPN’s interface, and it’ll only use your VPN. If your VPN connection drops/isn’t turned on, qBit simply won’t be able to connect.
There's a simpler option for those who like Transmission: https://lemmy.world/comment/5269089
I disagree that it’s simpler, because most VPNs will use dynamic IPs. So any time your internet flickers or your power goes out, you’ll need to reconfigure Transmission with the new IP. Sure your method works for a kill switch. But it requires manual intervention every time it gets killed. With qBit’s interface binding, it doesn’t care what the VPN’s IP is. All it cares about is that it’s using the specific interface. So if the VPN is disconnected (and the VPN’s interface has no connection) then qBit simply thinks there’s no connection to the internet.
It doesn't. You can specify your VPN provider range instead of a single IP and you won't need manual intervention.
If you go the systemd route you can do it even better with RestrictNetworkInterfaces:
So I guess this is a better option than doing IP or IP range restrictions - zero manual intervention like you do in qBit. I'm so used to work with IPs instead of interfaces (because of the issues that can cause) that I even forgot about that option.
That doesn't look like a simpler option to me...
In what way does this seem simpler to you?
It’s not just about being simple, it’s about 1) still using transmission - because some people like decent and simple torrent clients and 2) a systemd enforced network restriction is way safer than whatever bind to interface / IP setting a program might come up with.
But you called it a simpler option, that's why I'm asking
Its simpler than having to learn another torrent client or whatever, at the end of the day what I'm suggesting is adding a line to a text file with the interface.
So simpler if you already use Transmission? Okay I get it now.
:)