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

91–100 of 257 posts

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

#91

Post by silisili »

deanCommie wrote: post #88
rch wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried subscribing to a few news sources, including WaPo, but I can't handle the political agendas (right, left, or any of it). I've had better luck with subscription based aggregators, but nothing exciting enough to want to plug one in particular. Always looking for new options to try.

I think the key question isn't which political agenda they have, but whether they report facts or opinions. In that regard, WaPo is pretty good but you can still do better: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/

It's not nearly that simple. You can essentially print an opinion based only in fact, both by picking carefully which stories you cover, and also which details of which story you choose to report. It's completely possible to frame the exact same story as either left wing or right wing using only facts.

If you want recent proof, look at that debacle with that Toledo kid. Some reported police shoot an armed thug, some report police shoot an unarmed kid. The video proof shows neither side is telling the whole truth.

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

#92

Post by dathinab »

tyingq wrote: post #28
Fnoord wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Means nothing. Companies can be a front for a government.

Well, yes, but I'm interested in "for what purpose, in this specific case".

The simplest would be to make sure the addresses are not announced by the DoD, which depending on the thinks they want to test could matter, or could be irrelevant.

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

#93

Post by woleium »

xxpor wrote: post #69
WanderPanda wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how would nat help in this case?

If they're not actually using the whole /8 (highly likely), you can setup a 1:1 NAT. basically from network b, if you want to talk to network a, you find out the address in 11/8 that corresponds to the 10/8 address and vice versa. You can use split horizon dns to make it mostly transparent. Every networking problem in the world can be solved with more NAT or more encapsulation :)

what you call 1:1 NAT is just called NAT by cisco, the stuff most folks think NAT is is actually NAT+PAT (like what you run on your home router with a single public IP)

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

#94

Post by ufmace »

deanCommie wrote: post #88
rch wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried subscribing to a few news sources, including WaPo, but I can't handle the political agendas (right, left, or any of it). I've had better luck with subscription based aggregators, but nothing exciting enough to want to plug one in particular. Always looking for new options to try.

I think the key question isn't which political agenda they have, but whether they report facts or opinions. In that regard, WaPo is pretty good but you can still do better: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/

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 anyone ever stating an opinion or saying something that isn't true.

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

#95

Post by crooked-v »

dkdk8283 wrote: post #37
codeproject wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks a lot, Appreciate. It is not I don't want to pay the washingtonpost.com. I just don't have time to read them.

It’s the principle for me. I won’t support any publication with obvious bias.

Everyone has bias of one kind or another.

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

#96

Post by jessriedel »

frombody wrote: post #76
yftsui wrote: post #75

Previous story in 2015: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10006534 . This article is exaggerating by saying it happened overnight, which started actually 5 years ago.

Global Resource Systems LLC was only created in September of last year. It is very much worth asking who this legal entity is and why a private company is better suited to these efforts than the government.

In practice the US government is constrained from paying market rates for tech talent. It can either hire companies to complete the entire project, or it can hire a consulting service (which skims off a massive overhead) to provide technical talent inside a government agency.

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

#97

Post by WalterGR »

echelon wrote: post #80
cmeacham98 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"edit: Downvotes? Really?" is a surefire method of attracting downvotes.

I got -4 in downvotes. (-2 before my edit.) I don't know what's going on. I understand when I call out Apple or Google for bad behavior that I can attract downvotes. Sometimes my posts are snarky, and I understand in that case too. But I can point to instances where posts I made days ago were all downvoted in unison. Or completely informational threads where every single one of my comments gets a downvote or two. Jus…

You already got feedback in hobs’s comment. They wrote:

“I didnt downvote, but random speculation with no evidence doesn't get upvotes on hacker news; a discussion of things you find interesting that others find baseless with get you downvotes immediately.”

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

#98

Post by crooked-v »

rch wrote: post #36
codeproject wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks a lot, Appreciate. It is not I don't want to pay the washingtonpost.com. I just don't have time to read them.

I've tried subscribing to a few news sources, including WaPo, but I can't handle the political agendas (right, left, or any of it). I've had better luck with subscription based aggregators, but nothing exciting enough to want to plug one in particular. Always looking for new options to try.

Every news source of any kind has some sort of bias. The only way to escape that completely is to live alone in the woods as a hermit.

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

#99

Post by capableweb »

dannyw wrote: post #43
jasonhansel wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe DoD is trying to catch security flaws caused by traffic intended for their own internal networks accidentally reaching the public internet? Advertising those IPs publicly and logging all traffic could be a good way of detecting such bugs in DoD systems.

It also explains the lack of public commentary.

Not sure. If the government is doing something large-scale in public (like construction projects [or maybe global IP routing]), they should communicate what is happening before doing it, in order to not phase people.

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

#100

Post by twic »

TechBro8615 wrote: post #26
pgn674 wrote: post #7

"several Chinese companies use network numbering systems that resemble the U.S. military’s IP addresses in their internal systems" I don't think I've heard of this before. What does it mean? Does China operate a disconnected BGP network? Or do they have some modified protocol, or what?

Way back when, I was working at a startup with little clue what I was doing. Long story short, I setup a VPN network to connect 600 devices through 8 wifi routers to a VPC. I used 11.0.0.0/8 because I didn't want to bother sorting through the conflicts with 10.x, 192.168.x, and 172.x which were all used at various places throughout the chain (e.g. the routers on 192, some upstream services on 10.x and 172.) All I had…

I did the same with 51/8 back when that was owned by the UK Department of Work and Pensions but not publicly routable.
Post reply on HN