Should I have to watch marketing events to make sure I'm not being spied on?
1,012 karma · joined January 13, 2021
I don't think it ever did? Looking here[1] it still seems to be supported.
I know m68k support was going to be removed at one point but it was saved in the end[2]
Nice work though! I wouldn't even know where to start with something like this! you're a wizard
[1]https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/master/gcc/config/m68...
They come from Europe to NZ - that is literally travelling the world.
There's a reason a large proportion of kiwis move to Australia and not the other way around.
So France is over 10x richer then
But if I have firewall policies that allow connections only to specific services I need a destination address and port (yes, some firewalls allow host names but there's drawbacks to that)
> IP addresses aren't authenticated, they can be spoofed
For anything bidirectional you'd need the client to have a route back to you for that address, which would require you compromising some routers and advertising it via BGP etc.
You can spoof addresses all you want but it will generally not do much for a stateful protocol
Authentication is only part of the problem, networks are firewalled (with dedicated appliances) and segmented to prevent lateral movement in the event of a compromise
I think we're envious that Apple did a better job of engineering their systems
They also had backwards caps on the CD32 and A4000
You can get anything working in minutes, even IPSEC if you are using static keys with no authentication or authorization involved
And there will probably never be any standard (non-commercial) "upper-layer" because of this.
The project prides itself on being much simpler than IPSEC etc but that's easy when you leave out half of the functionality
Please elaborate.
As they say a typical DNS request comes in as one packet and is replied in one packet, there is no ongoing connection so there's no point keeping tracking information.
The implication of not tracking the connection is that any packets will have to match a more specific rule than the "allow established,related" at the top of the firewall chain.
> they would be better off trying to make DNS a TCP-only service to stop amplification attacks.
Sure, lets get literally everyone on the intenet to agree to a new version of DNS that uses TCP...
Even if you do that - the problem moves from conntrack filling up we can fill up on ephemeral ports stuck in TIME_WAIT because some genius thought a service that doesn't maintain a connection should use TCP
He owns the paper, they just work there.
Why on earth would you continue to use it? If it does succeed someday that's on you
Not much use to an attacker if the token / approle is restricted to a specific IP / EC2 instance id.
Auditable too
I'm not sure how they're related? How is something MS allegedly did with Office over 20 years ago related at all?
It's not like they can make plaintext source files incompatible with other IDEs
Of course it's a post relating to MS so there will be at least one such comment
Hyped it up to be some massive thing but it turned out to be a massive nothingbuger for me at least