31–40 of 158 posts
And that is why I'm using dns over tls :)
TLS is not a silver bullet. If an attacker controls the host behind what everyone believes to be 1.1.1.1, nothing is to prevent them from applying for a legit certificate.
Interesting! My ping to that address went terrible for a brief window today - https://i.imgur.com/KjCcBeT.png Wonder if this was the cause. *edit: I'm in Cape Town and the ping looks what was routing to a DC down the road decided to go to Europe instead.
Interesting! My ping to that address went terrible for a brief window today - https://i.imgur.com/KjCcBeT.png Wonder if this was the cause. *edit: I'm in Cape Town and the ping looks what was routing to a DC down the road decided to go to Europe instead.
Hey, what software are you using to collect the data and display that graph? I wouldn't mind running something on my server that could notify or log if 1.1.1.1 (and other services I rely on) are slow or down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hey, what software are you using to collect the data and display that graph? I wouldn't mind running something on my server that could notify or log if 1.1.1.1 (and other services I rely on) are slow or down.
That looks like smokeping
And that is why I'm using dns over tls :)
I doubt that this is a genuine hijacking attempt. All it takes is a Cisco router and some IT admin making up an address.
I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes a semi-regular occurrence.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, the issue persists. While I can access your site from mobile and residential connection, any static business connection fails. No 1.1.1.1 involved. I tested this with two different Fibre connections (Berlin).
Is the BGP hijack over?
IP : 79.69.113.214
Time: Tue May 29 15:28:30 BST 2018
And that is why I'm using dns over tls :)
If you're using DNS-over-HTTPS, you should be safe though.
dnscrypt-proxy enforces pinning (the parent cert signature is included in the DNS stamp required to connect), and I guess Firefox and cloudflared also do.