If not, you can download the latest version here: http://www.downloadmoreram.com/download.html
Is your internet up to date?
21–30 of 78 posts
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends where you live. In Storrington the internet is rubbish and no phone signal. This is 2017 UK. Driving to London from that region you lose mobile signal at least 5 times completely. People act so entitled when they live in cities; I happen not to like cities which makes me a minority, but there are plenty of wealthy business people crying every day about their connection south of London (and probably in more pl…
My parents live in a Dorset village and have the same issues. I'm on Three and even in the nearest towns (Dorchester, pop. 20k and Weymouth, pop. 50k) there is usually no or a very weak signal. They finally rolled out BT Infinity last year, so at least that's something. I live in Lithuania now and it really shocks me how bad the UK is for these things. Here I have 600/600 FTTH for €20/month and LTE is basically unive…
It's cheap in Lithuania and other countries because they were was no significant prior investment in telecoms infrastructure, and the costs of deployment are generally lower too (cheaper labour, easier planning-permission) - so when it comes to deploying Internet access to a previously disconnected community it only makes sense to roll-out the bleeding-edge technology (e.g. FTTH).
Whereas in the UK, BT was/is obsessed with squeezing every last drop of bandwidth from POTS connections - because the cost of upgrading everyone's last-mile connections from copper (or even aluminium in some cases) to fibre is very cost-prohibitive: look at the sheer cost the cablecos shouldered during the mass roll-out of coax in the early-1990s (and even then, it was only to boxes in the street, not houses) - I understand their near-bankruptcy from this move lead to them all coming together under NTL and Telewest, and then Virgin Media.
(The only thing that is inexplicable is how even modern, brand-new housing developments still have unshielded copper last-mile connections instead of FTTH: they don't even lay conduits to make it easier for possible future FTTH... idiocy)
Give the UK a few more years and there should be a mandate from above requiring FTTH and we'll see progress: maybe even 10Gig FTTH as standard, then the tables will turn and people in Lithuania will be stuck with their 1Gbps service until their next round of major infrastructure investment, potentially decades away.
(I'm aware that Fibre is generally more future-proof than copper, and a high-quality fibre line that handles 1Gbps today can easily handle 10Gbps, and potentially 40Gbps or even 100Gbps in the future - so my entire argument may be moot)
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#23Wow, this is terribly misleading DNSSEC propaganda. It tells me: "Protected from redirection to false IP addresses (DNSSEC)" What does that mean? It means that whatever other DNS server I use seems to verify DNSSEC signatures (I use Google's DNS fwiw). Yet this doesn't provide any reasonable sense of protection, as the connection to that DNS server may very well be compromised. This would very well show DNSSEC protec…
I thought DNSSEC was supposed to be verifiable by the client ? If it isn't then it's pointless in the way that you suggest, but I find it hard to believe that hole was left.
Congratulations, you've understood the main hole of dnssec.
The thing is: you can verify dnssec on the client. In theory. It's just that 99,9% (rough estimate, may be higher) of people don't. You'd have to run your own resolver. Which might work, if your ISP isn't doing funny things with your DNS traffic. Which some ISPs do. Which means it can't be deployed widely.
This thing was built in the 90s when people assumed you have some dns that some admin you trust manages in some trusted network. Moving it to today's internet is pretty much impossible.
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#24[deleted]
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mine is, and I live in the UK also. I'm not sure what joke you're making. Sure, we may not have the best bandwidth (although at my previous house I had 250MBit), but supporting IPv6 (etc) has nothing to do with being in the UK. Find a decent ISP, I recommend Zen (or if you can afford them, AA).
I live in India and having 4 Mbps, which is a luxury. Not ready for IPv6. Situation is improving a lot recently though.
Probably you'll get IPv6 in India sooner than people in Europe.
I've read that the last mile in India is not yet liberalised and that's a huge growth factor in Internet usage.
Once this barrier falls, invesment in network equipment (IPv6-enabled) will follow.
Older, aka "mature" markets like Europe need some kind on incentive to switch to IPv6. Usually goverment subsidies...
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
I thought DNSSEC was supposed to be verifiable by the client ? If it isn't then it's pointless in the way that you suggest, but I find it hard to believe that hole was left.
Congratulations, you've understood the main hole of dnssec. The thing is: you can verify dnssec on the client. In theory. It's just that 99,9% (rough estimate, may be higher) of people don't. You'd have to run your own resolver. Which might work, if your ISP isn't doing funny things with your DNS traffic. Which some ISPs do. Which means it can't be deployed widely. This thing was built in the 90s when people assumed…
( serious question - I might not know something )
If I run my own resolver, with a hardcoded [1] trust anchor, how could an ISP affect me regardless of what funny things it does with my DNS traffic...?
[1] https://sources.debian.net/src/bind9/1:9.10.3.dfsg.P4-10.1/b...
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because you've securely looked up an IP address, do your packets really arrive there? That's why DNSSEC without DANE seems pointless (and with DANE/TLS seems redundant).
It's a different threat model. Classical DNS (i.e. without port randomization and a whole host of other tricks) is very easy to spoof from all over the internet. Inserting yourself between a client and a server is way more difficult. Note that from the point of traffic analysis, you still don't want your TLS traffic to go through a third party. So if your thread model mostly includes nation-state attackers then DNSSE…
> If you also want to secure a lookup of, for example, pool.ntp.org then DNSSEC for A and AAAA records also makes sense.
The fun part begins when you realize you can't validate DNSSEC because your time drifts too much. So how do you get your initial sync from pool.ntp.org with DNSSEC validation enabled?
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
Congratulations, you've understood the main hole of dnssec. The thing is: you can verify dnssec on the client. In theory. It's just that 99,9% (rough estimate, may be higher) of people don't. You'd have to run your own resolver. Which might work, if your ISP isn't doing funny things with your DNS traffic. Which some ISPs do. Which means it can't be deployed widely. This thing was built in the 90s when people assumed…
( serious question - I might not know something ) If I run my own resolver, with a hardcoded [1] trust anchor, how could an ISP affect me regardless of what funny things it does with my DNS traffic...? [1] https://sources.debian.net/src/bind9/1:9.10.3.dfsg.P4-10.1/b...
It'll just break and you won't have a working DNS.
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#29The number of websites unreachable for not having IPv6 equals 0, so saying your internet is not "up to date" because you don't have IPv6 doesn't mean much
Re: Is your internet up to date?
#30Wow, this is terribly misleading DNSSEC propaganda. It tells me: "Protected from redirection to false IP addresses (DNSSEC)" What does that mean? It means that whatever other DNS server I use seems to verify DNSSEC signatures (I use Google's DNS fwiw). Yet this doesn't provide any reasonable sense of protection, as the connection to that DNS server may very well be compromised. This would very well show DNSSEC protec…
Yes. I like what they are trying to do, but they don't seem to actually think things through. It took me forever to get some of the server tests fixed, where it would report that my server didn't properly support IPv6 (in DNS) when in fact it did and just their test was wrong. For me it says now 'your DNS service providers are:' and then the name of the netblock owner. The actual name server is in my network.
Currently the page is also showing a false negative in this case. My local DNS recursor validates DNSSEC:
;; flags: qr rd ra ad; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 4, ADDITIONAL: 1
Not protected from redirection to false IP addresses (DNSSEC)