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

Millions of the Pentagon’s dormant IP addresses sprang to life on January 20

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–257 of 257 posts

Re: Millions of the Pentagon’s dormant IP addresses sprang to life on January 20

#251

Post by chipsa »

walrus01 wrote: post #89
chipsa wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you'd be surprised. Most NIPR computers just use a regular proxy server for internet access. But example: 214 /8 is a DoD owned block, and "weather.af.mil" is on that block, and both externally and internally reachable.

Not that NIPR computers don't have access to the internet - but because this isn't 1987, those individual workstations would never have public facing DoD v4 IPs. They'll always be behind some combination of NAT and firewall or as you mentioned, proxy. Certainly there could be some DoD public IP on the external interfaces of said firewalls. If I had to guess very often the public facing side of those boxes might be a…

I'm logged into my Google account, and it shows a certain IP address as where I'm logged in from. Checking ipconfig shows the same IP address as being the computer I'm on. The proxy will of course show it as being the actual source, but Google is smart enough to show the IP address that the proxy says it's proxying for. AFAICT, there's no NAT, but there is a firewall blocking traffic that doesn't run through the proxy.

Re: Millions of the Pentagon’s dormant IP addresses sprang to life on January 20

#252

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

cesarb wrote: post #230
trulyme wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ipv6 is like python3. A worthy upgrade, but tried to do too much in a single coup and broke backwards compatibility. If they simply added two top octets, saying that 0.0. . . . was the old ipv4, everyone would have used it ages ago. Instead they made other improvements which led to complex standard and worse adoption.

> If they simply added two top octets, saying that 0.0.... was the old ipv4, everyone would have used it ages ago. How would you "simply add two top octets"? The address fields in the IPv4 header are a fixed size of 32 bits. Every time this is discussed, someone comes up with this suggestion to "just make the addresses longer and change nothing else", but there's no way to make the addresses longer without changing s…

Yes, obviously you need a new wire format and bigger addresses; that was always going to change. What did not need to happen was changing/replacing DHCP, routing changes, and a half-hearted attempt to bake in IPsec.

Re: Millions of the Pentagon’s dormant IP addresses sprang to life on January 20

#253

Post by deanCommie »

frogpelt wrote: post #129
ufmace wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That isn't really how it works anymore. It's possible (and standard) to push any political agenda without ever stating an opinion directly. It's all about which specific facts you choose to report and which you choose to ignore. It's very easy to select and report only facts that make group A look good, or only facts that make them look bad. In that way, 2 news sources can give people the opposite opinion without any…

And furthermore, public sentiment (and therefore elections) are decided by what the main sources of media determine is the most important news. Example: Cops have shot a thousand people a year for several years in a row (maybe a decade). About 300 of those each year have been black, which is a disproportionate amount by some measures. However, it is nowhere near the biggest problem in our country even for black peopl…

> However, it is nowhere near the biggest problem in our country even for black people.

Something tells me you're not qualified to speak on the behalf of black people (even if you were black).

Something tells me that when you choose to categorize what is happening in the US as looting, burning, and rioting (with a casual acknowledgement to protest), then you don't have a very empathetic understanding of the message people are trying to carry across, or why they believe this is a much bigger problem than you deem it to be.

It's not about the pure numbers of deaths. It's about the countless other scenarios just like the infamous ones that led to deaths that black people encounter throughout the US every single day, and have to wonder if they're about to become yet another name, or worse, just a statistic. It's about living in a continual state of terror that the forces of the state that are OSTENSIBLY there to "protect and serve you" do anything but. It's like living in East Germany and being constantly afraid of the STASI, only it's 2020 and it's the US.

That can be a much bigger problem then poverty, drug addiction, or anything else you might point to as a "bigger problem in this country for black people".

Re: Millions of the Pentagon’s dormant IP addresses sprang to life on January 20

#254

Post by deanCommie »

MathCodeLove wrote: post #156
shigawire wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes - cops should kill fewer people.

What does that statement have to do with the comment you're responding to? Yes cops should kill fewer people, but as the person to whom you replied mentioned, police violence is far from the most serious issue facing the US currently. Let's get outraged at the obesity epidemic, let's revolt against black on black violence in the inner cities, let's "defund" platforms which encourage division and turmoil. Even my comm…

> Let's get outraged at the obesity epidemic

Michelle Obama tried to make this her primary focus through the entire Obama administration. Like everything else the Obamas did, the Right wing that is currently engaging in the same whataboutism and dogwhistles as this sentence, chastised it at the time as elitist and un-american.

> let's revolt against black on black violence in the inner cities

* https://www.afterschoolalliance.org/afterschoolsnack/VOX-5-R...

* https://abcnews.go.com/US/black-black-crime-loaded-controver...

> let's "defund" platforms which encourage division and turmoil.

While I broadly agree with you that social media platforms are a problem that needs fixing, "defunding" them is a nonsensical statement that only makes sense in reference and in direct contrast to "defunding the police".

These platforms are not "funded" because "funding" in this context refers to allocation decisions of PUBLIC TAXPAYER FUNDS. Private companies are not collecting tax dollars then spending them on fun riot gear to go cosplaying in as they gas people exercising their first amendment rights.

The whole premise of "defunding the police" is to reallocate public funds to different programs that we currently task our police with (mental health, drug addiction, sex work, etc))

Re: Millions of the Pentagon’s dormant IP addresses sprang to life on January 20

#255

Post by jhenefreeman »

I saw a recommendation about this professional hacker Amir khan, from a comment section and he recovers any hacked social media account and he offers any hacking services. He's the greatest I've seen so far, you can get in touch with him through whatsapp +12403660688.

Re: Millions of the Pentagon’s dormant IP addresses sprang to life on January 20

#257

Post by kdmdmdmmdmd »

tigershark wrote: post #185
CameronNemo wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alternatively, money is grifted for political patronage.

Are you saying that the most corrupt US president ever (an individual so mentally challenged that managed to bankrupt FOUR casinos, the only money making machines where the customers literally throw money at you) grifted billion of dollars from the most valuable IP4 addresses in the world?

Thanks for the freespeech link
Post reply on HN