Re: Confused about IPv6 vs. NAT.
With IPv6 all hosts have a public address, but networks should still have a firewall, offering the same protection as a NAT firewall by allowing outgoing connections but not incoming.
13 publicly visible posts • joined 7 Aug 2011
Won't a large number of these never have been involved in criminal activity? Don't people deposit bitcoin into personal accounts, then use them (or not) to buy things which are probably (but may not be) illegal. Wouldn't they need to locate and prosecute each individual owner of these one before selling their assets? It's very easy for people to prove ownership in this case by providing their login credentials.
I'm too lazy to actually read the specification, but why is it such a problem for major Linux distributors (Ubuntu, Redhat) to build secure bootloaders and sign them properly in the same way that Microsoft do with Windows?
I realize yhey would then sign kernels accordingly, and of course end users would never be able to build their own kernels (else malware could do the same), but most don't need to.
Not necessarily an approach popular with hardcore free software types, but on most of my desktop systems where I don't build my own kernels, I'd happily see my system made more secure by an Ubuntu signed secure kernel.
Penguin, because.
"Therefore if your passwords are hashed but not salted, a hash can only be added at the point the user changes their password."
Not totally true. You can rehash the password any time you have the plain text version which can be done the next time the user logs in. Of course, if the passwords have been leaked you should be asking them to change it when they log in anyway!
It's probably worth brute forcing those passwords themselves and invalidating the weak ones.
1) An application layer attack prevents the possibility of spoofing an IP address, so every source will be identifiable.
2) Ask the police to go and knock on the door of every location originating these attacks.
3) The police will meet one of 2 people: some kid's parents, or a Tor exit owner who might reconsider running their node if this is what it is being used for.
If the chance of the police showing up at your door were 50% instead of 0.001% then maybe they'd think twice. I'd never suggest that people be prosecuted because their network was being used illegally, but a visit from the police can be very persuasive.