Would be possible to pass all of the internet traffic through a SSH tunnel to another computer and access the internet through that connection? This would be as a security precaution.
My current setup is guest: Ubuntu 10.04 running on host of OS X 10.6 . Network is on virtual box is setup as NAT.
If it is not possible to pass all traffic through an SSH tunnel what about specific ports?
Thanks in advance.
Guest traffic through SSH Tunnel
-
Ahri
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 9. Jul 2010, 10:08
- Primary OS: MS Windows XP
- VBox Version: OSE other
- Guest OSses: Linux
Re: Guest traffic through SSH Tunnel
I, too, would like to know the answer to this question.
-
sickill
- Posts: 3
- Joined: 17. Nov 2011, 12:15
- Primary OS: Fedora other
- VBox Version: OSE Fedora
- Guest OSses: Linux, Windows XP
Re: Guest traffic through SSH Tunnel
Here is the complete solution that works great for me: http://ku1ik.com/2011/11/12/tunnel-vm-network-ssh.html
-
Ahri
- Posts: 2
- Joined: 9. Jul 2010, 10:08
- Primary OS: MS Windows XP
- VBox Version: OSE other
- Guest OSses: Linux
Re: Guest traffic through SSH Tunnel
I found this solution, which, whilst slightly unstable, works rather well so long as you have an endpoint set up with ssh and python:
https://github.com/apenwarr/sshuttle
By "slightly unstable" I mean I have to restart it sometimes, but I managed to get a surprising level of performance out of it, including torrenting at ~1MBps. I can't compare this to torrenting on the same network without tunnelling (because it's banned) but I would say that the network is not particularly fast, so 1MBps is close to maxing it out. (Yes, I mean MB, not Mb!)
https://github.com/apenwarr/sshuttle
By "slightly unstable" I mean I have to restart it sometimes, but I managed to get a surprising level of performance out of it, including torrenting at ~1MBps. I can't compare this to torrenting on the same network without tunnelling (because it's banned) but I would say that the network is not particularly fast, so 1MBps is close to maxing it out. (Yes, I mean MB, not Mb!)