I would love it if someone could change my mind on this:
The words unblockable and uncensorable have been misused in the documentation.
Real-world example: 99% of my colleagues cannot bring their own devices into our corporate workplace to access torrents via DHT. There are some network rules and filters in place to block most non 443 traffic. Those 99% are effectively blocked.
Setting a remote HAProxy server to mask miscelaneous traffic as https was a practical way out through the firewall, which then exposed my HAProxy server to a block by IP rules.
This is an idea I'd love to be wrong about. Bock-resistant is the most appropriate statement for this project in its present form. Change my mind :)
You have to set up your https tunnel on AWS or GCP and then tunnel that to your own server. They will not range block AWS, and you can vary the IP every day.
There are projects who are using collateral freedom to block censorship like Wireleap (https://wireleap.com/blog/routing-layer/). This would help in the circumstance you describe.
The words unblockable and uncensorable have been misused in the documentation.
Real-world example: 99% of my colleagues cannot bring their own devices into our corporate workplace to access torrents via DHT. There are some network rules and filters in place to block most non 443 traffic. Those 99% are effectively blocked.
Setting a remote HAProxy server to mask miscelaneous traffic as https was a practical way out through the firewall, which then exposed my HAProxy server to a block by IP rules.
This is an idea I'd love to be wrong about. Bock-resistant is the most appropriate statement for this project in its present form. Change my mind :)