dave@feddit.uk to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 11 days agoCIA tracing those IPv44 addressesfeddit.ukimagemessage-square39linkfedilinkarrow-up1289arrow-down14
arrow-up1285arrow-down1imageCIA tracing those IPv44 addressesfeddit.ukdave@feddit.uk to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · 11 days agomessage-square39linkfedilink
minus-squareAgent641@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up40·11 days agoYeah by using out-of-bounds numbers they avoid accidentally listing legitimate values who might get upset or free advertising
minus-squareMimicJar@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up19arrow-down1·11 days agoThey could just use IPv6. Legitimately values or not no one is going to understand them, much less get upset by them.
minus-squarepivot_root@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up18·11 days agoThe attack was coming from ::1 Or if that’s too unbelievable, fe80:: has some scary implications while also not likely to ever be a real device.
minus-squareexuAlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up10·11 days agoYou can also use 200::/7. It’s been deprecated since 2004
minus-squareKushan@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·11 days agoThere are already several reserved IP ranges for this kind of purpose, like 198.51.100.0/24 or 203.0.113.0/24.
Yeah by using out-of-bounds numbers they avoid accidentally listing legitimate values who might get upset or free advertising
They could just use IPv6. Legitimately values or not no one is going to understand them, much less get upset by them.
The attack was coming from ::1
Or if that’s too unbelievable, fe80:: has some scary implications while also not likely to ever be a real device.
You can also use
200::/7. It’s been deprecated since 2004Nice rabbithole, thanks
There are already several reserved IP ranges for this kind of purpose, like 198.51.100.0/24 or 203.0.113.0/24.