Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

dslreports.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 382 posts

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#211

Post by wu_tang_chris »

Zren wrote: post #118
_bxg1 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a reference for the ipv6 address being blocked? That would be a much bigger smoking gun

https://blog.cloudflare.com/dns-resolver-1-1-1-1/ > For IPv6, we have chosen 2606:4700:4700::1111 and 2606:4700:4700::1001 for our service. It’s not as easy to get cool IPv6 addresses; however, we’ve picked an address that only uses digits. For me up in Canada, ping 1.1.1.1 works. But ping6 2606:4700:4700::1111 ping6 2606:4700:4700::1001 shows "connect: Network is unreachable". Am I using ping6 wrong? We also need to…

> Am I using ping6 wrong?

I'm pretty sure the other end has to be running `pingd` to get a response from ping. Some do, some don't.

I might be wrong but that's always been my understanding.

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#212

Post by Moru »

mabbo wrote: post #8

I wonder if anyone has considered some sort of legislation whereby internet service providers are not allowed to block or disrupt service to certain parts of the internet in order to promote their own business model.

This is almost funny. We have the exact opposite problem in Sweden, it was just in the news today. One ISP has been convicted for allowing access to facebook even though the user has reached it's data limit for the month. This is unfair competition since the local swedish newspapers are still blocked when you reach your limit.

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#213

Post by beedogs »

userbinator wrote: post #55
driverdan wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe something about being neutral on the internet.

Net neutrality started disappearing long before it was even called "net neutrality" --- a lot of residential ISPs won't even let others send packets to the full 64K port range of TCP/UDP to the IP it gives you, blocking some of them for "security reasons", throttling/cutting off certain protocols like BitTorrent, censoring "malicious" sites, etc. If we want true Internet connections we're going to have to fight a lot…

With CGNat, you're lucky if you even get a routeable IP address anymore. ISPs have actually gotten substantially worse over the past ten years in this regard.

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#214

Post by godzillabrennus »

jfoutz wrote: post #61
harshreality wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were blocking 1.1.1.1 on some firmwares long before cloudflare's dns service started. From what I've read, the routers use it on some internal interface. It's likely incompetence, not malice. If they didn't want people using other DNS, and were willing to fuck with ip addresses they don't own to accomplish that, they'd be blackholing google's and opendns's public caching nameservers too. It might even have been…

It’s weird at&t is in such poor technical shape that they can’t control a single ip address, and then just use that. This was an organization that sustained five mines of uptime for decades. Crazy to see a fallen (or broken up) titan struggle with basic stuff. I mean, basic compared to their heyday.

You would be amazed at how antiquated telecom companies are. They port numbers manually in many scenarios.

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#215

Post by topranks »

bb88 wrote: post #182
rrix2 wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who's advertising this when AT&T has a legal monopoly or duopoly in your town?

The arguments for anti-net-neutrality has basically come down to "let the free market sort it out." I don't agree with that, but if we can't have net neutrality, at least define to the customers what the "internet" means. And in that case, the town just lost it's internet. What makes you think the residents won't remember this come election day?

The problem with the "let the market decide" is that there is no free market for Internet access in the US!

In most areas there is effectively a government imposed monopoly on who can provide you access. So there is no "market" to normalise things. You simply cannot vote with your feet.

In Europe, where the regulatory framework is different, people would just switch ISPs if one started acting in bad faith.

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#216

Post by regecks »

skrause wrote: post #210
hamandcheese wrote: post #199

I really wish Cloudflare would have used a "normal" IP for their DNS service. That way there would be no confusion whatsoever as to whether this is malicious or a bug.

1.1.1.1 is a normal IP.

> The Cloudflare-APNIC experiment uses two IPv4 address ranges, 1.1.1/24 and 1.0.0/24, which have been reserved for research use. Cloudflare's new DNS uses two addresses within those ranges, 1.1.1.1 and 1.0.0.1.

They had acknowledged to themselves going into it that the IPs weren't "normal". They could have easily chosen a safer range if that was a priority.

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#217

Post by tekproxy »

bb88 wrote: post #14
mabbo wrote: post #8

I wonder if anyone has considered some sort of legislation whereby internet service providers are not allowed to block or disrupt service to certain parts of the internet in order to promote their own business model.

The argument I've made is that if they're blocking certain parts of the internet, then they shouldn't be allowed to call themselves an Internet Service Provider.

I'm fine with this. It's fraud otherwise.

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#218

Post by tekproxy »

bb88 wrote: post #14
mabbo wrote: post #8

I wonder if anyone has considered some sort of legislation whereby internet service providers are not allowed to block or disrupt service to certain parts of the internet in order to promote their own business model.

The argument I've made is that if they're blocking certain parts of the internet, then they shouldn't be allowed to call themselves an Internet Service Provider.

Organic, fair trade, vegan, gluten free internet service provider

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#219

Post by moviuro »

Zren wrote: post #118
_bxg1 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a reference for the ipv6 address being blocked? That would be a much bigger smoking gun

https://blog.cloudflare.com/dns-resolver-1-1-1-1/ > For IPv6, we have chosen 2606:4700:4700::1111 and 2606:4700:4700::1001 for our service. It’s not as easy to get cool IPv6 addresses; however, we’ve picked an address that only uses digits. For me up in Canada, ping 1.1.1.1 works. But ping6 2606:4700:4700::1111 ping6 2606:4700:4700::1001 shows "connect: Network is unreachable". Am I using ping6 wrong? We also need to…

Missing brackets probably:

  ping6 '[2606:4700:4700::1111]'

Re: AT&T updates firmware to block access to 1.1.1.1

#220

Post by hvidgaard »

Moru wrote: post #212
mabbo wrote: post #8

I wonder if anyone has considered some sort of legislation whereby internet service providers are not allowed to block or disrupt service to certain parts of the internet in order to promote their own business model.

This is almost funny. We have the exact opposite problem in Sweden, it was just in the news today. One ISP has been convicted for allowing access to facebook even though the user has reached it's data limit for the month. This is unfair competition since the local swedish newspapers are still blocked when you reach your limit.

Look at it the other way around. They're blocking everything except Facebook. It's the same, but instead of 1 IP, they're blocking almost everything.
Post reply on HN