mine one more worst, stuck forever ip 42.x.x.x with bad routing & congestion issue, cannot get other ip range at all

already give up, now wait unifi contract end and switch to other isp

This post has been edited by Azusa_San: Sep 8 2024, 06:26 PM

It was already like this since past years, unless you disconnected long enough before u reconnect back, higher chance to get different prefix

The pros for this make ur internet work similar to static ip, a quick disconnect and reconnect ur apps or anything will continue to work online without reestablish connection

Cons = if your current ip got flagged or banned, or bad routing, it's very difficult to switch different prefix ip like you guys experiencing now

Correct me of im wrong, im not an expert in this

This post has been edited by squall0833: Sep 8 2024, 06:33 PM

I’ll still be talking to MCMC since they did help me in the past (Minister Fahmi filed a legal request on my behalf to Meta to remove someone who was yapping too much about his so called ethnic privilege) and I would like to meet them personally.

I think that this is a continuation of that help, but I think maybe it’s too arrogant to say that that’s the case - I want to understand why they did this, though, so I will talk to them tomorrow.

This post has been edited by Exoflare: Sep 8 2024, 06:56 PM

Its the first win. How do they expect to blackhole the so called offending site in the first place? Dns is the easiest and cheapest solution, the first query to the internet.

Granted they could still achieve blackhole without dns involvement, by mitm and redirect the actual connection itself not the initial dns query, but it'll be really expensive really quick. So far only the chinese gfw managed to do that whole countrywide but their network is already a separate countrywide lan in the first place. Tm tried with ssl mitm earlier and it failed miserably, browsers just showed red warning when the supplied cert isn't tally with the endpoint domain. Most site used https nowadays.

Granted they could still ask/force individual device in this whole country to install a mitm root cert so their bogus cert would be accepted, but i doubt google, apple, microsoft, mozilla would agree to. Kazakhstan tried the forcing mitm root cert on its citizen hardware route, but mozilla and google reacted by insta blacklist the cert, cutting the idea short lived.

What if TM buy Intermediate Certificate and do proxy like Cloudflare, TM can sign certificate to any Alt domain or IP

Report to Mozilla Security and the CA/Browser Forum will not just ban TM for life, they will ban the root too.
Look at what happen to Entrust, out of business overnight.

Also browser properly enforce Path Length Constraint, this will not even take off

Yes. Mustn't become complacent because they 'listened' this time. The coming kill switch should be viraled on socmed next to show that this isn't the end of it. That also should bantah all the way.

If people were scared of DNS hijacking, controlling socmed should be equally scary or worse. This time cannot even say that 'lol u just want to watch prawn' because it involves all the sites and services the majority use.

This post has been edited by blackbox14: Sep 8 2024, 07:46 PM

Cf mitm cert are widely trusted by default via the root cert chain of trust. And they sign with domain owner explicit consent. Tm problem is to make their cert that signed whatever domain they want without explicit consent by domain owner, to be trusted by default globally. Browsers would just display red warning.

Selfsign cert without chain of trust, without domain owner consent is already a thing for years. In fact i can already sign a cert for google.com, instruct my browser to trust the bogus cert, instruct my browser to explicitly use my local authoritative dns only, add a bogus zonefile for google.com on my authoritative dns myself, add dns record pointing google.com to an ip hosted to a server locally, visit google.com on the said browser and no red warning, green lock key and all in address bar. But its just that, only trusted by just my 1 browser. Tm problem is to do all that, selfsign, convince browser to trust the said cert etc, for the whole freakin country.

It's unfeasable, see the kazakhstan example earlier. While their citizen maybe already yolo install the mitm root cert, along comes browser manufacturer insta blacklist it.

Bonus : For the code who doesn't use the system trusted certificate chain, they are still bound to this issue.

That would be crazy if I just want to crawl some data with Java/Python and have to disable the verification where it is not supposed to be. I don't even know whether the url I'm connecting to is a legit one or not.

I don't understand what a "kill switch" entails. What is it? 😁

yeah, Predator carried by TM is seems like phn16-72-78nu i7/4050 version. IMO this sku is not worth looking at. there is also i7/4060 outside but this stock is very low or has already run out.


TUF 16 comes with significantly weaker processor (13650hx) but with same 4050. This sku is kinda overpriced if look outside.

i will get neither of them from TM.

This post has been edited by MyProLife: Sep 8 2024, 08:07 PM

👍
Ok. Let us know what went down...

win a battle.

lose the war.

Like how Bangladesh turned off the entire internet because people are against the governemnt policy.

Anybody can play or view videos from youtube? Mine suddenly unable to do so

Anyone getting constant high latency on multiple SG servers? eg. Valorant, Pathofexile, etc...
Heck, even my google & hotmail is loading very slow past few days

And how India shut down the internet during exam

With all of this going on, gonna ask a quick question here...

Will things like starlink mitigate interruptions like this? Or legislation will get over this?

Like the others said, it's just that: a kill switch. If at any time government deems online spread of information is disadvantageous to them or can 'threaten national security', they can simply switch off the internet.

Granted, there are 2 versions of this kill switch that we've heard of: some outlets report it as a 'social media killswitch' and some report it as 'internet kill switch.'

Both are obviously extremely damaging to the entire country. No situation justifies turning off access to information or the internet as a whole in 2024.

I wish to know too. Considering they have a valid service provider license, I guess by law they should comply.

But perhaps big brother will look the other way if the user base is small.