I had my account hacked, and it also happened to a friend a few weeks ago (and i m unable to reclaim it because they ask for the day i registered). Is it possibly related to the transition?
Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
61–70 of 107 posts
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Frankly speaking I'm not familiar with IPv6 NAT. So to hide IPv6 corporate network structure it is necessary to send outside all IPv6 packets with one global address. Is this an only option? It should be possible to hide internal network structure with some address shuffling techniques.
IPv6 NAT (or, more precisely, PAT/NAPT) is pretty much identical to it's IPv4 ancestor. One external (globally routable) IP Address which represents the entirety of the internal IP address space. If you are on a corporate LAN, and your IPv6 address is from the RFC4193 range (it starts with "FD" e.g. FDC2:D343:1234:5678:..." ), and, you are accessing IPv6 resources outside your company, then some kind of PAT/NAT/Proxy…
The brilliant and problematic property of the translation (and why I think it will catch up) is that it allows to easily make your today's problems someone else's problems five years down the road. Noone gives a ding about what happens in five years in one's network - let alone the larger internet.
BTW, next time you talk with the "address-hiding security" fans, check what result they get from http://panopticlick.eff.org/ - very curious!
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or instead of engaging in conspiracy theores with zero proof we should look at whats going on here rationally. Skype is really unacceptable in any corporate environment. I don't want a random PC on my network to be a superpeer and suddenly use my 50mbps connection routing calls to the world. Run skype for a couple of mins, fire up tcpview, and watch calls come in and out. Not only is this a waste of my resources it a…
He phrased it like a conspiracy theorist, but it's a little naive to think that intercept capability wasn't a factor in this decision. As far as I know skype was the biggest player in communications that wasn't being completely monitored.
Skype went down for a couple days about a year or two ago, as did a few other voip services at around the same time. I suspect this is more than just a single company that is behind it, rather the US government.
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#64Everything Skype does will soon be replaced by WebRTC anyway.
How soon?
I presume you mean this - http://www.webrtc.org/.
Is it just a more simple way of setting up chatroulette style sites only using browser native programming rather than relying on Flash?
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#65What alternatives to skype exist? Something that does voice, and not likely to invade my privacy.
I would recommend looking at something like Mumble http://mumble.sourceforge.net/ Assuming you are concerned about the code you run, the location you run it in, etc. Does not provide encryption to my knowledge, but VPN can solve that. If you are looking for something more robust that can interconnect with telecom stuff, I'd suggest http://www.freeswitch.org/ or http://www.asterisk.org/
Mumble requires a server.
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#66What alternatives to skype exist? Something that does voice, and not likely to invade my privacy.
Teamspeak is another option, along the lines Mumble. There are others. It's a diferent concept from Skype. ONe person has to run a server. They choose who they want to be on the P2P network. Teamspeak is closed source.
Free SIP services are another option, but not easy enough for the novice who is in a hurry and just want things to work. Most people seem to use SIP servers operated by companies, not running the servers themselves. Some ISP's are selling pre-packed VOIP service (and some are deep inspecting every packet, lol).
Skype has the market now. It is ubiquitous. It's easy to use and works reasonably well.
But to think Skype will become the world's new default global communications channel, with MS in control, is just silly.
Skype is just a hint of what's possible, given today's bandwidth and a network that no one player controls.
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would recommend looking at something like Mumble http://mumble.sourceforge.net/ Assuming you are concerned about the code you run, the location you run it in, etc. Does not provide encryption to my knowledge, but VPN can solve that. If you are looking for something more robust that can interconnect with telecom stuff, I'd suggest http://www.freeswitch.org/ or http://www.asterisk.org/
Mumble requires a server.
I don't know of any truly distributed encrypted voice systems you can trust out there. Hosting your own server for a service seemed like the next rational way to solve the persons question.
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#68Let me just make this very clear: you don't go from zero operating cost to multiple millions of hardware and colo space to do the very same thing, in a move so transparent that it needs security researchers to dig into your program to find out it has happened at all. I guess Skype (by extension, Microsoft) is growing interested in what people are speaking about. To get hold of that data you need to route it through y…
Aren't Skype supernodes more like DNS? Just telling the two parties how to connect with each other and then getting out of the middle?
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
IPv6 NAT (or, more precisely, PAT/NAPT) is pretty much identical to it's IPv4 ancestor. One external (globally routable) IP Address which represents the entirety of the internal IP address space. If you are on a corporate LAN, and your IPv6 address is from the RFC4193 range (it starts with "FD" e.g. FDC2:D343:1234:5678:..." ), and, you are accessing IPv6 resources outside your company, then some kind of PAT/NAT/Proxy…
The brilliant and problematic property of the translation (and why I think it will catch up) is that it allows to easily make your today's problems someone else's problems five years down the road. Noone gives a ding about what happens in five years in one's network - let alone the larger internet. BTW, next time you talk with the "address-hiding security" fans, check what result they get from http://panopticlick.eff…
I'm one of those "address-hiding security" fans - I've architected and deployed more than 7 million (currently operational) IPv6 nodes, 100% of them in RFC 4193 space. We have many layers of security. Link Layer Security, Application Layer Security, Firewall Security, IPsec Security, App Transport Security in addition to the non-routability security.
I've never understood security professional who turn their nose up at the usefulness of using a non-routable IP address in your environment. It's always seemed self evident to me, that putting your resources on something like "192.168.1.5" - on an internal network, in addition to all of the other steps you take, would be yet another layer of defense that makes an attackers life difficult. And, in an enterprise environment, I would rather optimize for security than ease of two-way communication with external entities.
Re: Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
But not large scale trawling of all call data or the ability to mirror all traffic to another location as far as I know.
Of course not; thats not "lawful interception" in the countries that Skype would market such services to. They don't have access to that large-scale data anyway, hence my comment on getting access to it by routing it through your own infrastructure.
Right, which is the "intercept problem" I was talking about. Your concept of "lawful interception" is pretty dated when we're talking about national security agencies rather than police.
The NSA is splitting signals and trawling everything for what they want, it's how it's done now. The recent wired article about the new datacentre was pretty interesting. Which was, as far as i know, not possible with the p2p architecture that skype had previously.