Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're IT, I'm IT, We're all IT.
We all use floats down here.
For representing monetary values.
When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
121–130 of 265 posts
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
The (somewhat affordable) productized NASes all suffer from big tech diseases. I think a lot of people underestimate how easy a "NAS" can be made if you take a standard PC, install some form of desktop Linux, and hit "share" on a folder. Something like TrueNAS or one of its forks may also be an option if you're into that kind of stuff. If you want the fancy docker management web UI stuff with as little maintenance as…
I don't even understand what kind of webui one would want. All you really need is a bunch of disk and an operating system with an ssh server. Even the likes of samba and nfs aren't even useful anymore.
A bunch of out-of-the-box NAS manufacturers provide a web-based OS-like shell with file managers, document editors, as well as an "app store" for containers and services.
I see the traditional "RAID with a SMB share" NAS devices less and less in stores.
If only storage target mode[1] had some form of authentication, it'd make setting up a barebones NAS an absolute breeze.
[1]: https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/257/systemd...
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#123Oh god this sucks, i've been setting up lots of services on my NAS pointing to my own domains recently. Can't even name the domains on my own damn server with an expectation of privacy now.
> Can't even name the domains on my own damn server with an expectation of privacy now. You never could. A host name or a domain is bound to leave your box, it's meant to. It takes sending an email with a local email client. (Not saying, the NAS leak still sucks)
I have internal zones in my home network and requests to resolve them never leave the private network. So no, it's not meant to.
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Is "clown GCP Host" a technical term I am unaware of, or is the author just voicing their discontent? The term has been in use for quite some time; It is voicing sarcastic discontent with the hyperscaler platforms _and_ their users (the idea being that the platform is "someone else's computer" or - more up to date - "a landlord for your data"). I'm not sure if she coined it, but if she did then good on her! Not eve…
> the idea being that the platform is "someone else's computer" I have a vague memory of once having a userscript or browser extension that replaced every instance of the word "cloud" with "other peoples' computers". (iirc while funny, it was not practical, and I removed it). fwiw I agree and I do not believe using "the cloud" for everything is a good idea either, I've just never heard of the word "clown" being used…
“Cloud to butt” was popular in the early cloud days. It went around Google internally, and caused some… interesting issues.
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#125I bought a SynologyNAS and I have regretted already 3-4 times. Apart from the software made available from the community, there is very little one can do with this thing. Using LE to apply SSL to services? Complicated. Non standard paths, custom distro, everything hidden (you can’t figure out where to place the ssl cert of how to restart the service, etc). Of course you will figure it out if you spent 50 hours… but w…
please don't do this to your synology leave it to serve files and iscsi. it's very good at it if you leave it alone, no extra software, it will basically be completely stable. it's really impressive
Second this, just use it for files, it’s great for it. 10+ years uptime if you leave it alone.
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know much about email, but how would some random service send an email from my domain if I've never given it any auth tokens?
You don't need any auth to send an email from your domain, or in fact from any domain. Just set whatever `From` you want. I've received many emails from `root@localhost` over the years. Admittedly, most residential ISPs block all SMTP traffic, and other email servers are likely to drop it or mark it as spam, but there's no strict requirement for auth.
You can, but most email providers will immediately reject your email or put it into spam because of missing DKIM/DMARC/SPF
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#127Slightly surprised that this blog seems to have succumbed to inbound traffic.
Rachel has blogged quite a bit about blocking badly behaved RSS Clients in recent years. I'd link you to one of the articles if I wasn't blocked too, and my VPN wasn't also blocked!
> Rachel has blogged quite a bit about blocking badly behaved RSS Clients in recent years.
Unfortunately that blocking is buggy and overzealous.
I just gave up eventually and unsubscribed from the RSS feed.
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#128Not sure why they made the connection to sentry.io and not with CT logs. My first thought was that "*.some-subdomain." got added to the CT logs and someone is scanning *. with well known hosts, of which "nas" would be one. Curious if they have more insights into sentry.io leaking and where does it leak to...
That hypothesis seems less likely and more complicated than the sentry one. Scanning wildcards for well-known subdomains seems both quite specific and rather costly for unclear benefits.
Bots regularly try to bruteforce domain paths to find things like /wp-admin, bruteforcing subdomains isn't any more complicated
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
Obl. nitpick: you mean paranoia, presumably. Schizophrenia is a dissociative/psychotic disorder, paranoia is the irrational belief that you’re being persecuted/watched/etc. Btw, in this case it can’t be paranoia since the belief was not irrational - the author was being watched.
You are right, I meant paranoid. >Btw, in this case it can’t be paranoia since the belief was not irrational - the author was being watched. Yes, but I mean being overly cautious in the threat model. For example, birds may be watching through my window, it's true and I might catch a bird watching my house, but it's paranoid in the sense that it's too tight of a threat model.
One never knows, that owl might be electric.
Re: When internal hostnames are leaked to the clown
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't need any auth to send an email from your domain, or in fact from any domain. Just set whatever `From` you want. I've received many emails from `root@localhost` over the years. Admittedly, most residential ISPs block all SMTP traffic, and other email servers are likely to drop it or mark it as spam, but there's no strict requirement for auth.
> Admittedly, most residential ISPs block all SMTP traffic, and other email servers are likely to drop it or mark it as spam, but there's no strict requirement for auth. Source? I've never seen that. Nobody could use their email provider of choice if that was the case.
The 3 most common ISPs in the US are Comcast, Spectrum, and AT&T
Comcast blocks port 25: https://www.xfinity.com/support/articles/email-port-25-no-lo...
AT&T says "port 25 may be blocked from customers with dynamically-assigned Internet Protocol addresses", which is the majority of customers https://about.att.com/sites/broadband/network
What ISP are you using that isn't blocking port 25, and have you never had the misfortune of being stuck with comcast or AT&T as your only option?