Yet another shadowsocks implementation for nodejs to help you bypass firewalls.
Shadowsocks is a light weight and efficient proxy tunnel and nodejs is a very good choice to achieve both flexibility and good performance in this situation.
And I have found that many of who are familiar with shadowsocks-nodejs may be curious about the memory usage so that I have finished some simple benchmarks to measure its behavior.
You can get the benchmark details here or even test your own shadowsocks implementation.
After some simple benchmarks that compare both the node and python implementation, my conclusion is:
-
Node has a different GC strategy but it's, of course, able to keep thousands of connections with a reasonable memory usage. It's not a bug, it's a conscious time/space trade-off.
-
Each request would cost less time to get responsed (even 50% less time in some situations).
-
Node implementation is less likely to fail requests in high concurrency situation.
And the higher concurrency benchmarks may be meaningless as the bandwidth and network environment would become the actual bottleneck in the real world.
Do Please point out my faults if I have missed something or get something wrong.
node >= v4
It's recommended to use node v6 to achieve better performance.
Shadowsocks-js has been tested in osx and ubuntu 14 but it's also expected to work in windows.
$ npm i -g shadowsocks-js
Use localssjs (local ssjs) to start clients to communicate with applications. The localssjs server will also serve a pac file at http://127.0.0.1:8090 (by default) for your apps to avoid unnecessary tunnel work.
You may prefer to navigate clients page and choose clients for your devices instead of using localssjs.
Use serverssjs (server ssjs) to start your remote server.
Use localssjs -h or serverssjs -h to show cli options:
Proxy options:
-c config path to config file
-s SERVER_ADDR server address, default: 127.0.0.1
-p SERVER_PORT server port, default: 8083
-l LOCAL_ADDR local binding address, default: 127.0.0.1
-b LOCAL_PORT local port, default: 1080
-k PASSWORD password
-m METHOD encryption method, default: aes-128-cfb
-t TIMEOUT timeout in seconds, default: 600
--pac_port PAC_PORT PAC file server port, default: 8090
--pac_update_gfwlist [URL] [localssjs] Update the gfwlist
for PAC server. You can specify the
request URL.
--level LOG_LEVEL log level, default: warn
example: --level verbose
General options:
-h, --help show this help message and exit
-d start/stop/restart daemon mode
Start clients that bind at 1088:
$ localssjs -b 1088
Start daemon:
$ localssjs -d start -b 1080
Log verbosely:
$ serverssjs -d start --level verbose
Update GFWList for your .pac file server:
$ localssjs --pac_update_gfwlist
Update GFWList for your .pac file server from a specific URL (default url):
$ localssjs --pac_update_gfwlist http://firefoxfan.cc/gfwlist/gfwlist.txt
{
"serverAddr": "127.0.0.1",
"serverPort": 8083,
"localAddr": "127.0.0.1",
"localPort": 1080,
"pacServerPort": 8090,
"password": "YOUR_PASSWORD_HERE",
"timeout": 600,
"method": "aes-128-cfb",
"level": "warn",
"localAddrIPv6": "::1",
"serverAddrIPv6": "::1"
}Specify your config file with -c flag:
$ serverssjs -c config.json
You can change default config in config.json file of your global shadowsocks-js
package.
- aes-128-cfb
- aes-192-cfb
- aes-256-cfb
- bf-cfb
- camellia-128-cfb
- camellia-192-cfb
- camellia-256-cfb
- cast5-cfb
- des-cfb
- idea-cfb
- rc2-cfb
- rc4
- rc4-md5
- seed-cfb
$ npm test
$ npm run watch
I intend to implement UDP relay and I have implement it in shadowsocks-js but I can't find an effective way to test this in real world networking. Please create issues to help us if you know any applications that support UDP-socks well.
BSD