After more 2 000 000 (two million) views on forum for 1.5.0.x development versions... and 1.6.1.0, 1.6.3.0-dev versions
A new stable version, UltraVNC 1.6.4.0 and UltraVNC SC 1.6.4.0 have been released: https://forum.uvnc.com/viewtopic.php?t=38095
Feedback is always welcome

2025-12-05: Celebrating the 23th anniversary of the UltraVNC (26th anniversary since the laying of the foundation stone): https://forum.uvnc.com/viewtopic.php?t=38130

2025-12-03: Could you please complete our poll/survey? Renaming UltraVNC files and service to be more clear: https://forum.uvnc.com/viewtopic.php?t=38128
There was a problem to vote, it is solved now! Thanks in advance!

2025-12-02: We need help: English Wikipedia UltraVNC page has been requested to deletion: https://forum.uvnc.com/viewtopic.php?t=38127
Any help is welcome to improve the UltraVNC page and/or to comment on the Wikipedia Talk page

2025-05-06: Forum password change request: https://forum.uvnc.com/viewtopic.php?t=38078

2023-09-21: Important: Please update to latest version before to create a reply, a topic or an issue: https://forum.uvnc.com/viewtopic.php?t=37864

Development: UltraVNC development is always here... Any help is welcome
Feedback is welcome

Join us on social networks and share our announcements:
- Website: https://uvnc.com/
- GitHub: https://github.com/ultravnc
- Mastodon: https://mastodon.social/@ultravnc
- Bluesky/AT Protocol: https://bsky.app/profile/ultravnc.bsky.social
- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ultravnc1
- X/Twitter: https://x.com/ultravnc1
- Reddit community: https://www.reddit.com/r/ultravnc
- OpenHub: https://openhub.net/p/ultravnc

SC Firewalls/Routers

Any features you would like to see in UltraVNC? Propose it here
Post Reply
rca221
8
8
Posts: 11
Joined: 2005-07-28 22:45

SC Firewalls/Routers

Post by rca221 »

My extremely disparate wish list is to have SC make a connection when both sides are behind a firewall and or router so that the remote side does not required firewall intervention. The remote side users are very concerned and do not understand just what they are giving permissions for. I would like to see SC become a truely single click for the remote side users. I thought a repeater would solve this remote side firewall intervention but does not appear to do so. This is the biggest thing on my wish list that is for sure. HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
thedarkener
8
8
Posts: 18
Joined: 2005-09-30 17:03
Location: Santa Rosa, California
Contact:

??

Post by thedarkener »

I'm not sure what you mean by the repeater not providing this functionality - that's exactly what it does (Mode 2). Both viewer and server create an OUTGOING connection to the publically accessable repeater, which joins the two ends together.

SERVER -> NAT -> INTERNET/REPEATER <- NAT <- VIEWER

No port forwarding, no security issues unless you are under very strict control where outgoing connections are restricted. There really isn't anything you could do about that, though. If your users are complaining that Norton Internet Security is asking them permission to allow an outgoing conection, it's not like SC can get around that.
Post Reply