Mixed Signals

[provisionally]

I first came across TrackerControl years ago beause I wanted a way to block internet access to apps and trackers but could not use it because my VPN is a critical need. I now see remote VPN routing through providers like Mullvad and IVPN in the README, which could make TC a complete solution for me, but since the latest version is not yet released on Github, I decide to pass the time by checking the issues and now I am very confused because I keep seeing these template responses in recently closed issues, like #450 and #583.

TrackerControl intentionally uses a small company/category-level blocking model with safe defaults rather than a growing set of per-host and per-subdomain controls. Adding this granularity would increase configuration and attribution complexity and move the app toward a general firewall. Closing as outside the focused product scope; Exclude from VPN remains the recovery path when required traffic breaks.

Thanks for the suggestion. TrackerControl is deliberately a focused tracker blocker rather than a general-purpose firewall, and avoids adding per-app, per-network, proxy, logging, preset, or bulk-control knobs that expand that role. NetGuard, from which TrackerControl was forked, is the appropriate project for fine-grained firewall workflows. The per-app Exclude from VPN control remains available when an app needs to bypass TrackerControl entirely.

I am not sure why NetGuard, which does not have VPN support, is recommended but to get to the more pressing matter, is the scope to do the minimum with respect to VPN functionality, usability, and UX? Were I to use this and open an issue of that nature, should I expect it to be closed?

[kasnder]

The VPN functionality will be deployed soon. It's a major change and needs thorough testing first.

[provisionally]

That makes perfect sense, but my worry is more the quoted text as it relates to future issues that will be opened once it released.

I depend on my VPN. Their app is very well designed and continuously improved, especially the UX, but its lack of a firewall to limit internet access has been a pain point for years now, so I regularly research solutions. TC is more or less the firewall aspect already and this WireGuard support seems like it gives me what I want. It may be over presumptuous but I am less sure about that seeing Closing as outside the focused product scope on issues, like 450 and 583, I would definitely have opened myself were I to be using it.