naughtysoul/telemt
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 2 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update README.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Alexey
2026-01-20 01:32:39 +03:00
committed by GitHub
parent 2ce8fbb2cc
commit eb8b991818
1 changed files with 6 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

6
README.md
View File

@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
- [IP](#bind-on-ip) - [IP](#bind-on-ip)
- [SOCKS](#socks45-as-upstream) - [SOCKS](#socks45-as-upstream)
- [FAQ](#faq) - [FAQ](#faq)
- [Recognizability for DPI + crawler](#recognizability-for-dpi-and-crawler)
- [Telegram Calls](#telegram-calls-via-mtproxy) - [Telegram Calls](#telegram-calls-via-mtproxy)
- [DPI](#how-does-dpi-see-mtproxy-tls) - [DPI](#how-does-dpi-see-mtproxy-tls)
- [Whitelist on Network Level](#whitelist-on-ip) - [Whitelist on Network Level](#whitelist-on-ip)
@@ -242,6 +243,11 @@ enabled = true
``` ```
## FAQ ## FAQ
### Recognizability for DPI and crawler
Since version 1.1, we have debugged masking perfectly, for all clients without "presenting" a key,
we transparently direct traffic to the target host.
- We consider this a breakthrough aspect, which few people managed to achieve in perfect form.
- Based on this: if configured correctly, **TLS mode is completely identical to real-life handshake + communication** with a specified host.
### Telegram Calls via MTProxy ### Telegram Calls via MTProxy
- Telegram architecture **does NOT allow calls via MTProxy**, but only via SOCKS5, which cannot be obfuscated - Telegram architecture **does NOT allow calls via MTProxy**, but only via SOCKS5, which cannot be obfuscated
### How does DPI see MTProxy TLS? ### How does DPI see MTProxy TLS?