[nirv]

Did it put you off using openssh/openvpn/libressl/etc? Is there the Torvalds effect? Let maintainers express their discontent in the form they prefer.

I see how @zx2c4 might be concerned about possible reputation risks due to the release of this closed-source implementation at the earliest WireGuard stage. Given that the author of TunSafe is not a security expert. Especially if (suddenly) TunSafe turns out to have security flaws, right before the WireGuard team releases an official open-sourced implementation. However, WG is an open protocol, and @ludde has the right to develop and sell whatever he wants on its basis.

[ascorbic]

It didn't stop me using them, but it certainly is off-putting. It's not a black and white issue though. The value I get from Linux easily outweighs any issues from Linus being a bit of a knob. I'm also unlikely to have to deal with Linus as a user. WireGuard, on the other hand, is a small project where the maintainer jumps in to discussions on HN. If that's how he behaves here, I'd rather not have to deal with that if I have a support question.

[namelost]

I'd say the author comes across as immature, which is kind of a bad look if you are making security software.

[lvh]

How, specifically? Are they immature for suggesting against using a closed-source implementation of the WireGuard protocol? Is your concern their tone about said implementation?

[e12e]

Might be more appropriate to compare with "ssh" and a Tatu Ylönen-effect in the case of ssh. Although openssh certainly became a significant fork.