Of course not. They removed it because it saves them money, thus increasing their profit margins.
Should is not does, and also LOL @ anycast for some SMB's internal networking. Yeah, good luck with that bud. > when it's broken it's broken cuz you broke it No duh, but that doesn't make it any less broken.
This is a very poor straw man. In IPv6 world you wouldn't get 2001::/112, you'd get 2001:1234:5678:90ab::/48. So your building might actually be at best something like 2001:1234:5678:90ab:1::.
It doesn't matter if the wifi is encrypted or not. All that matters is that you share the network with an attacker. You can ARP poison just fine, encrypted or open, wifi or wired.
Erm... no.
Don't worry, you're only allowed to see responses to stuff if you're logged in. Hope they don't ban you from having an account for daring to @ musk.
Well, they are really wireless. Wireless costs more because suddenly you need to deal with antennas and RF and whatever. Adding a wire back on top of that doesn't magically make it cost less again.
Nothing has taken its place, and you didn't even get anything cheaper. The only one who won was Apple.
> These are all big companies out to make a buck. != not bad
Yes, IPv6-first is definitely the way to do it. Just be careful not to run into Github's issue (https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/5y8b8lsqbbyq) or Google's issue (https://i.imgur.com/4gGECJ9.png - in case you're…
Perhaps, but the other realistic option is a self-signed cert. Since browsers refuse to implement any kind of TOFU or otherwise 'trust history', a self-signed cert is pretty much exactly equivalent to no TLS at all.
> One day, an intermediary system is hijacked which carries your traffic, and your weather information can be rewritten in transit. Your credibility for providing outstanding data is compromised when you start serving…
I disagree. So does Wikipedia ("where the attacker secretly relays and possibly alters the communications between two parties who believe that they are directly communicating with each other, as the attacker has…
It's a fake background. It's also clearly from Google Meet so... yeah. If he was worried about retribution (from Google, anyway) then they probably wouldn't have been using a Google service.
Is it? Or is the problem the similarity of the concepts?
> What does "unauthenticated" even mean here? That you're not logged in. > You aren't logged in, not logged in isn't a state of "unauthenticated" What? Yes it is. > you haven't given any credentials meaning currently…
Sometimes they might have been able to allocate it more compactly - but how do you predict exactly what your needs will be in 20 years? Other times they might not have been able to allocate it more compactly - are you…
I didn't have IPv6 available from the sole (land-based) ISP who offered service at my last house, Altice USA (Suddenlink/Optimum). I moved away about 13 months ago. (Worse yet their modem/router did RAs or whatever but…
Of course not. They removed it because it saves them money, thus increasing their profit margins.
Should is not does, and also LOL @ anycast for some SMB's internal networking. Yeah, good luck with that bud. > when it's broken it's broken cuz you broke it No duh, but that doesn't make it any less broken.
This is a very poor straw man. In IPv6 world you wouldn't get 2001::/112, you'd get 2001:1234:5678:90ab::/48. So your building might actually be at best something like 2001:1234:5678:90ab:1::.
It doesn't matter if the wifi is encrypted or not. All that matters is that you share the network with an attacker. You can ARP poison just fine, encrypted or open, wifi or wired.
Erm... no.
Don't worry, you're only allowed to see responses to stuff if you're logged in. Hope they don't ban you from having an account for daring to @ musk.
Well, they are really wireless. Wireless costs more because suddenly you need to deal with antennas and RF and whatever. Adding a wire back on top of that doesn't magically make it cost less again.
Nothing has taken its place, and you didn't even get anything cheaper. The only one who won was Apple.
> These are all big companies out to make a buck. != not bad
Yes, IPv6-first is definitely the way to do it. Just be careful not to run into Github's issue (https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/5y8b8lsqbbyq) or Google's issue (https://i.imgur.com/4gGECJ9.png - in case you're…
Perhaps, but the other realistic option is a self-signed cert. Since browsers refuse to implement any kind of TOFU or otherwise 'trust history', a self-signed cert is pretty much exactly equivalent to no TLS at all.
> One day, an intermediary system is hijacked which carries your traffic, and your weather information can be rewritten in transit. Your credibility for providing outstanding data is compromised when you start serving…
I disagree. So does Wikipedia ("where the attacker secretly relays and possibly alters the communications between two parties who believe that they are directly communicating with each other, as the attacker has…
It's a fake background. It's also clearly from Google Meet so... yeah. If he was worried about retribution (from Google, anyway) then they probably wouldn't have been using a Google service.
Is it? Or is the problem the similarity of the concepts?
> What does "unauthenticated" even mean here? That you're not logged in. > You aren't logged in, not logged in isn't a state of "unauthenticated" What? Yes it is. > you haven't given any credentials meaning currently…
Sometimes they might have been able to allocate it more compactly - but how do you predict exactly what your needs will be in 20 years? Other times they might not have been able to allocate it more compactly - are you…
I didn't have IPv6 available from the sole (land-based) ISP who offered service at my last house, Altice USA (Suddenlink/Optimum). I moved away about 13 months ago. (Worse yet their modem/router did RAs or whatever but…