So if you are trying to pen test some machines you own and Comcast points you to their server who is to blame? Are you really responsible if Comcast hijacks your DNS requests and sends you to their server?
I was testing against a known invalid DNS entry (ie: personally owned but not parked domain name). How are you responsible when they hijack your connection?
Even better is when someone pwns Comcast's server and and exploits all of Comcast's customers with a browser exploit hosted there.
All nice theories, good luck getting a judge to buy any of that. Judges tend to have little tolerance for a big tongue-in-cheek house-of-cards scenario.
No, don't call in for the opt-out. Just call in to complain about the fact that they're doing it at all. Preferably including a lengthy technical description about why it's a terrible idea and breaks the internet.
I'm sure the script-reader in Comcast's "support" will be enamored at your "lengthy technical description."
Most of these people hate their jobs as much as we hate the existence of their positions.
Bottom line: If they're polite and helpful, I think it's being a bit of a jackass to annoy them and waste their time. If they're snippy and rude (commonly are, unfortunately) then it's fair game.:)
AFAIK, it's not possible for a cable ISP to simply "detect" your MAC address. They probably log the IPs assigned to MACs for auditing/subpoena purposes, but this isn't some simple ip2mac() thing they can call.
As for the delay in processing your opt-out- I imagine the database/configuration isn't written on-the-fly as people submit requests, but is handled in batch jobs in off-peak times like most everything else in legacy systems.
2) anyone care to explain how in the world my host system hits their pages for good sites but the guests usually do not?
Varying DNS configuration in the host/guest OS's?
If you are using a consumer router/gateway device for your WAN, try setting your host and guests' DNS servers to the LAN IP of the router, most will pass DNS queries on to the NS it was given in its' DHCP lease.
Arguably this is less of a problem for an organisation like yours that [ostensibly] has some sort of deployment mechanism. You can probably easily configure your employees' laptops to use RFC-compliant DNS servers, whether yours or "public" ones.
That certainly doesn't make it any less evil on Comcast's part, though.
Properly functioning, if your DNS servers fail to respond, the ISP's name servers (that are configured on your system, usually by DHCP) would return an "NXDOMAIN."
This allows software to correctly inform the user that the host wasn't able to be resolved; when rogue ISPs like Comcast decide to start returning a different (and arguably hostile) IP for a host they can't resolve, instead of returning NXDOMAIN, stuff breaks and causes headaches for software developers, support, end users, and so on.
It doesn't take a "computer security expert" to know that you're unnecessarily risking your clients' confidentiality by sending your communications wholesale to a 3rd party.
To sum it up, when you find yourself born and raised in an environment in which most recipients of most legitimate complaints are insensate and unreceptive, the "force of the law" nature of legal remedies become the only undeniable way to call attention to even the slightest injustice.
This is very well said, and deserves modding up.
Civil action is oftentimes, unfortunately, the only way to get a 3rd party and/or the opposing side in your issue to take an actual look at your side of the argument
what, you wanted Gordon Freeman to be a black, 6 year old girl? i'm not sure how many people would enjoy battling mutants and enemy soldiers with a little girl as their character...
This sounds more like a B-title game our Japanese friends would produce.
Are you seriously suggesting that if more video games were produced in which the protagonist was (f.e.) black, that more black people would purchase the game?
I don't remember starting up GTA: SA for the first time and being like, "oh man, I'm black - this feels totally unrealistic!"
Having multiple CAs (and cheap CAs) is a good thing, but we're only ever secure with ssl as the least secure CA.
Sort of, but with regards to your personal security it's really just as secure as the least secure CA that is in the trusted list of the browser of your choice. Not that it makes this any better.
I think browsers should start removing CAs who aren't doing human verification..
but so many people seem unwilling to even get up to the speed limit, let alone exceed it by a few miles per hour, as if you're going to get a ticket for 48 in a 45...
Tell that to my officemate, who got a ticket for doing 48 in a 45 zone. It's utter BS, but they do give tickets.
People get hit by lightning too. Probably shouldn't go outside when it's raining.
Ads placed on Google and Bing's search result pages are, at the present, wholly billed on a CPC (cost-per-click) basis.
So one could conject that ROI may be a lot higher at Bing right now because of lack of competition (CPC is generally a loosely auction-driven model), but the volume to sustain your business is still at Google.
Slashdot Mirror
I just looked at my cablemodem and it has 4 MAC addresses associated with it:
HFC MAC Address
Ethernet MAC Address (probably not?!)
CM USB MAC Address
CPE USB MAC Address
I suspect that it is the first?
No sense entering it until I know if it makes a difference or just allows the scam to go on.
Thanks!
HFC is the one associated in DOCSIS, so 99% sure it's that one. And you're welcome.
So if you are trying to pen test some machines you own and Comcast points you to their server who is to blame? Are you really responsible if Comcast hijacks your DNS requests and sends you to their server?
I was testing against a known invalid DNS entry (ie: personally owned but not parked domain name). How are you responsible when they hijack your connection?
Even better is when someone pwns Comcast's server and and exploits all of Comcast's customers with a browser exploit hosted there.
All nice theories, good luck getting a judge to buy any of that. Judges tend to have little tolerance for a big tongue-in-cheek house-of-cards scenario.
No, don't call in for the opt-out. Just call in to complain about the fact that they're doing it at all. Preferably including a lengthy technical description about why it's a terrible idea and breaks the internet.
I'm sure the script-reader in Comcast's "support" will be enamored at your "lengthy technical description."
Most of these people hate their jobs as much as we hate the existence of their positions.
Bottom line: If they're polite and helpful, I think it's being a bit of a jackass to annoy them and waste their time. If they're snippy and rude (commonly are, unfortunately) then it's fair game. :)
AFAIK, it's not possible for a cable ISP to simply "detect" your MAC address. They probably log the IPs assigned to MACs for auditing/subpoena purposes, but this isn't some simple ip2mac() thing they can call.
As for the delay in processing your opt-out- I imagine the database/configuration isn't written on-the-fly as people submit requests, but is handled in batch jobs in off-peak times like most everything else in legacy systems.
2) anyone care to explain how in the world my host system hits their pages for good sites but the guests usually do not?
Varying DNS configuration in the host/guest OS's?
If you are using a consumer router/gateway device for your WAN, try setting your host and guests' DNS servers to the LAN IP of the router, most will pass DNS queries on to the NS it was given in its' DHCP lease.
Interfering with established web protocols could be, for a private citizen, prosecuted as a criminal act.
I stopped reading here. Let's save the ridiculous hyperbole for the mainstream media?
Arguably this is less of a problem for an organisation like yours that [ostensibly] has some sort of deployment mechanism. You can probably easily configure your employees' laptops to use RFC-compliant DNS servers, whether yours or "public" ones.
That certainly doesn't make it any less evil on Comcast's part, though.
Web browsers aren't the only thing that uses DNS.
Properly functioning, if your DNS servers fail to respond, the ISP's name servers (that are configured on your system, usually by DHCP) would return an "NXDOMAIN."
This allows software to correctly inform the user that the host wasn't able to be resolved; when rogue ISPs like Comcast decide to start returning a different (and arguably hostile) IP for a host they can't resolve, instead of returning NXDOMAIN, stuff breaks and causes headaches for software developers, support, end users, and so on.
It doesn't take a "computer security expert" to know that you're unnecessarily risking your clients' confidentiality by sending your communications wholesale to a 3rd party.
Nice find..
http://preview.tinyurl.com/lb3fo3
To sum it up, when you find yourself born and raised in an environment in which most recipients of most legitimate complaints are insensate and unreceptive, the "force of the law" nature of legal remedies become the only undeniable way to call attention to even the slightest injustice.
This is very well said, and deserves modding up.
Civil action is oftentimes, unfortunately, the only way to get a 3rd party and/or the opposing side in your issue to take an actual look at your side of the argument
Well we can't imprison corporations or put them to the death, but further those alternatives would only apply to the enforcement of criminal law.
Spare me the elitism, and tell me how do you suggest civil law be enforced?
The linux kernel wasn't written in a nights hacking in Linus' moms basement.
Yes, it took many thousands of nights' hacking in Linus' mom's basement.
what, you wanted Gordon Freeman to be a black, 6 year old girl? i'm not sure how many people would enjoy battling mutants and enemy soldiers with a little girl as their character...
This sounds more like a B-title game our Japanese friends would produce.
Are you seriously suggesting that if more video games were produced in which the protagonist was (f.e.) black, that more black people would purchase the game?
I don't remember starting up GTA: SA for the first time and being like, "oh man, I'm black - this feels totally unrealistic!"
That's preposterous.
I've always wondered this but never had the opportunity to post it remotely on-topic.
Can someone explain to a non-anime person (myself) why all the characters in Japanese cartoons appear caucasian?
I wasn't very clear - by "little disc of sheet metal," I meant a fake quarter to drop into a coin-operated meter.
Yeah, you're the first person to think of that idea.
Having multiple CAs (and cheap CAs) is a good thing, but we're only ever secure with ssl as the least secure CA.
Sort of, but with regards to your personal security it's really just as secure as the least secure CA that is in the trusted list of the browser of your choice. Not that it makes this any better.
I think browsers should start removing CAs who aren't doing human verification..
Tell that to my officemate, who got a ticket for doing 48 in a 45 zone. It's utter BS, but they do give tickets.
People get hit by lightning too. Probably shouldn't go outside when it's raining.
Ads placed on Google and Bing's search result pages are, at the present, wholly billed on a CPC (cost-per-click) basis.
So one could conject that ROI may be a lot higher at Bing right now because of lack of competition (CPC is generally a loosely auction-driven model), but the volume to sustain your business is still at Google.
After you jailbreak.
The show was just that good.
P.S. the shows today's kids get are not.
Is there some sort of club for jackoffs who like to talk fucking lies, with the score keeper counting how many similar jackoffs rally to the call?
Congress.
Maybe I'm the only one who feels this way, but as a regular donor to the EFF I'm a little uneasy about them spending my contribution in this way.
Thoughts from other contributors?
It's the only legal Ponzi scheme out there.
I don't think you know what that means.