Re:Aussie ISP gets eye-watering IPv4 bill, shifts to IPv6
by cm2187 on Friday July 05, 2019 @04:34AM
(#20360831)
Having to guess a 128bit AES key is also security through obscurity then!
Though it doesn't give any protection against local scanning.
Re:Aussie ISP gets eye-watering IPv4 bill, shifts to IPv6
by BrandoElFollito on Saturday July 06, 2019 @10:09AM
(#20369735)
I was about to comment exactly that.
This is security by realistic approximation of compute capacities and basic probability math.
Aka. good security
Re:Aussie ISP gets eye-watering IPv4 bill, shifts to IPv6
by reaperducer on Friday July 05, 2019 @04:21PM
(#20365542)
That seems like security through obscurity.
People on HN like to say that "security through obscurity" is not security at all. But there's a reason that the military puts its secret stuff out in the middle of nowhere.
Re:Aussie ISP gets eye-watering IPv4 bill, shifts to IPv6
by stevekemp on Friday July 05, 2019 @08:27AM
(#20361988)
> (and therefore miss out on certain IPv4-only services)
Such as github, for example. Something that really surpised me when I setup an IPv6-only virtual machine and then went to clone some projects to setup the host.
I have other hopes to get IoT more secure. Open source firmware, for starters. Support contracts where you don't buy the hardware but buy a working (and insecure isn't working) device.
The problem with IPv6 is that it is a chicken-egg problem. Those who get CGNAT plus native IPv6 are part of the unfortunate bunch who are not using native IPv4 (and therefore miss out on certain IPv4-only services). Meanwhile, the IPv4-only services are causing issues for CGNAT. The logical conclusion is that everyone who currently offers IPv4-only should (and should've been) focusing on adopting native IPv6 dual stack. The continuous procrastination, out of greed and egocentric thinking, is what caused the current situation in the first place.
My ISP tried to shove CGNAT with native IPv6 through my throat. My modem was unstable. BitTorrent didn't work well anymore. I could not use services over LTE anymore (my LTE provider, actually same provider as my cable, used IPv4-only back then; don't know now). I relied on that to work. So they gave me what I had before: IPv4 only. Why not dual stack first?