News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Analysis of the GFW's Unconditional Port 443 Block on August 20, 2025. Parent comment

Re:Analysis of the GFW's Unconditional Port 443 Block on Aug... by vintermann on Wednesday August 20, 2025 @01:55AM (#44959034)
It could also be a test to look for surprising things that break, in case they want to do this permanently at some later point.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Analysis of the GFW's Unconditional Port 443 Block on Aug... by woooooo on Wednesday August 20, 2025 @02:03AM (#44959078)
Hanlon's and Occam's razors point to it being a mistake by the GFW operators, imo.

If it's on purpose, I think you have the most likely motivation.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Analysis of the GFW's Unconditional Port 443 Block on Aug... by account42 on Wednesday August 20, 2025 @08:00AM (#44961062)
You shouldn't use razors haphazardly or you might cut yourself.

A mistake that also weirdly increments some TCP fields for the three subsequent RST packets when that's not how the existing GFW devices behave would need some explanation before you could conclude it to be the most likely explanation.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Analysis of the GFW's Unconditional Port 443 Block on Aug... by woooooo on Wednesday August 20, 2025 @08:51AM (#44961481)
A new hardware/software rollout is one of the more common breakage situations, though. It definitely could have been on purpose but my gamble is still on a fuckup with a new system rollout.
[ Parent | on HN ]