The CryptoStorm Speed Test Thread

Looking for a bit more than customer support, and want to learn more about what cryptostorm is , what we've been announcing lately, and how the cryptostorm network makes the magic? This is a great place to start, so make yourself at home!
User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 424
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 5:00 am

Re: The CryptoStorm Speed Test Thread

Post by df » Wed Oct 31, 2018 12:20 pm

With the Wireguard option it probably would be, but I wouldn't trust a VPS for anything that requires a high
level of security. Since it's a VM, you have no way of verifying the security of the system running the VM. Whatever security measures you do (firewall, grsecurity, FDE, strong passwords/keys, etc.) can all be circumvented if someone has root access to the host server. Plus, VPS bandwidth tends to be fairly limited/expensive in some regions. Probably enough for one person though.

Also, sometime soon we'll add Wireguard to all our servers.
I'd recommend waiting for that, but if you require more immediate traffic obfuscation than OpenVPN's --tls-crypt provides (what our ECC instances use), I'd say go with streisand. That setup does offer more obfuscation methods than we currently do.
But after or during our wireguard implementation, we'll most likely be adding extra obfuscation methods to our setup, so you could just wait for that as well.

FYI,, OVH,, and kimsufi usually offer very cheap 1gbps dedicated servers in France and/or the Netherlands.
At the moment has a 2.5gbps one for €11/month, and ... t-2-s-sata has a 1gbps one for €9.99/month.
With those, you wouldn't have to worry about the security issues that a VPS has since they're dedicated servers.

Posts: 24
Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2017 4:42 pm

Re: The CryptoStorm Speed Test Thread

Post by blurb » Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:20 am


Yeah, I glossed over everything but the speed comparison there didn't I. Thanks for clarifying the privacy implications, and I agree there isn't any privacy if they chose for there not to be - the power is all with them.

I do find those $5 instances fun to play with though, when I just want to tinker with something for its own sake, and treat them as a 'crowded room', temporary and disposable - probably spend a dollar a month. If any of my vague ideas go anywhere I'll take a good look at using the more solid options you linked, nice one. I liked those prices.

You guys will continue to be the ones to keep the list of the sites my family visit off my ISP's logs, and by extension out of the hands of the ~50 organisations my government said can access them as they please. Not due to it being very interesting in and of itself, non of us would even blush, but due to fuck-them; the principal. I much prefer the attitude I've picked up from you guys so you'll be our quasi isp.
"Also, sometime soon we'll add Wireguard to all our servers."

Yay. If you want the perspective of a mostly casual linux user who'll funnel 300gig/month of irritating youtube videos, xbox updates etc through it to beta test, I'd be more than willing to jump on early. I'm looking for an excuse to integrate it into my router and squeeze that last bit out of our connection.

User avatar
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 10:47 am

Re: The CryptoStorm Speed Test Thread

Post by KungFuChe » Tue Jan 15, 2019 10:00 pm

I noticed the web site and forum overhaul... so the home page now says: "The OpenVPN service provider for the truly paranoid". Well sure, anyone who is not paranoid is not paying attention ... but does this mean that plans to support wireguard have been abandoned? If not, can you give us some hint about your timeline for trials and full scale deployment? Are we talking weeks or months? Just wanted to have some idea of where I should be sending clients who ask about wireguard service.

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:47 am

Re: The CryptoStorm Speed Test Thread

Post by parityboy » Tue Dec 31, 2019 3:42 am


I recently upgraded to a 70Mb/s FTTC connection so I thought I'd share some results here. :) Connected to the Sweden node and pulling a copy of Linux Mint from the Swedish mirror, I get this:

Code: Select all

Resolving (, 2001:6b0:19::138
Connecting to (||:80... connected.
HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
Length: 2036826112 (1.9G) [application/x-iso9660-image]
Saving to: ‘linuxmint-19.3-cinnamon-64bit.iso’

linuxmint-19.3-cinnamon-64bit.iso      100%[=========================================================================>]   1.90G  7.28MB/s    in 4m 20s  

2019-12-30 22:50:03 (7.48 MB/s) - ‘linuxmint-19.3-cinnamon-64bit.iso’ saved [2036826112/2036826112]
Works out to 59.84Mbit/s; not bad considering I'm not using a node closer to me. :)

Post Reply