Anytime one of those "you can eat cuisine from one region of the world for the rest of your life" memes comes up, I'm baffled that anybody would fail to pick the region that contains both South and Southeast Asia.
obscurity is a form of concealment, but not cover.
concealment will make specific targeting -less than straightforward,but a scorched earth obliteration will get you along with all else.
cover, is a condition that is resistant to attack when you are visible.
you should have both, resistance to sequential action when you are specificly targeted, a obfusification of presence, minimizing the frequency of targeting.
it wont matter how many physical buttons you apparently have, if its not physical all the way through, that "button function" can be redefined, or taken away at any time.
no, its the problem that will be created by solving the touch screen problem, with a physical user interface, that is still just an input to a digital device.
its a dated article, but the concept of IP spoof works, and has been modified to fit the state of tech, its more than just forging the return address in an IP header.
The term IP spoofing used to really only apply to some networking layer in my experience, placing bogus ips in headers was more likely called header forgery and happened in the application. It wouldn't make sense for wikipedia to rely on easily forged headers when they can simply examine the network connection and use that address.
Actual IP spoofing still can't really impersonate a valid tcp connection unless its all send and no read, even with your second link, both sides of the "tunnel" have to spoof the source ip in their messages so thats not likely going to happen with wikipedia unless their security gets broken somehow and in that case well all bets are off lol
sure, but if your objective is to post from an ip other than your own, your second link would compare poorly against just renting some compromised host or cell phone from your friendly anonymous proxy black market. why try to shoehorn some wierd tunnel into wikipedias web server infrastructure when you can just post your propoganda with a genuine tcp/ip connection from a hacked cell phone lol
Isn't an actual technique, it's describing the observed result if the server were to blindly trust some HTTP headers which is just the application payload in a TCP stream. It's not spoofing the IP at any network layer.
Requires mutually agreed spoofing on both sides... at which point it's not really spoofing and also clearly not applicable because Wikipedia will not agree to it. (It is useful in the context that they're using it, just not at all what you're talking about)
Without controling a router that's on the path or being able to publish a route that contains the IP address you're trying to spoof, there is no way to spoof an IP address in bidirectional communication.
"blindly trust some HTTP headers"
"Without controling a router"
"Requires mutually agreed spoofing on both sides"
you understand the concepts, and the requirements for POC, but you are not the only one.
and for those who want a working weapon,they will have to identify ALL the requirements and implement it themselves. im not about to leave the weapon loaded and fully assembled in a public place.
it sounds like you are fully capable of manufacturing that weapon if you really wanted to.
also people really are soft, it starts with soc eng, and goes from there.
>it sounds like you are fully capable of manufacturing that weapon if you really wanted to.
A significant portion of the HN population could probably jury rig something up, it just has no value in the wikipedia case when you can simply hop on a compromised internet device, no spoofing needed. In the context of "foreign country posts lies with bogus ip", ip spoofing just can't compete when you can get the real deal full on two way functional tcp/ip connection from any acquired proxy device legal or not.
Look you're trying to make believe you have a secret weapon on a website where most folks know how computers work lol quit trying to make secret weapon happen when you don't actually have one.
when you use typos to broaden the scope of a warrant to include individuals that have not commited crime or acts prerequisite to indictment, you are exceeding the authority granted by a justice.
i would like to be privy to such discourse, as "your honour we need to include spellings of name or other identifiers, contrary to those of the person in the warrant you have issued."
confidential informant, witness protection, production value, financial advantage, non consensual photography by commercial entity, professional deriliction of confidentiality, and a partridge in a pear tree.
knowing first hand how the average alaskan reacts, [ primatively, visceraly, with large knife, or firearm, or both], this person was placed in danger, that was mandated to be mitigated, and was actually injured by an attack out of retribution.
this is why public surveillance for profit should stop.
a sweet korma, or a vindaloo are my most favorite.
reply