This is dedicated to all the hackers and the crackers, to the hackers and the crackers.
I see in binary, I speak source code, step on my toes, I'll post a million jpegs of you
and a fag pwned.
In your digital stance, getting firewalled ho, cause I'm riding the net in my six-fold.
I was a dick with my 56, now with my cable I'm able to get that stable.
On the out, my name is Ace and I'm a Leo. On the digital highway, my name is Neo and I'm a hero.
In a flash, I'll screw you on burning Dreamcast. You need some ISO? Let me through my hard drive rifle.
Our exchange you could never stifle. In a digital hug, you just caught the love bug.
I bootlegged your CD, I caused a fight between Un and Jay-Z.
Your CG, it's all gonna be free, whether we take it by force or we take it nicely.
You feel that rattling your bones? When I tell you we just hacked out Jones.
And NASDAQ leaves your fight on your back, cause I am he who loves to hack and crack.
Cause I am he who loves to hack and crack.
This is dedicated to the hackers and the crudents.
Serial codes, source codes, ISOs, RANS, SIFS, SIS.
This is dedicated to the hackers and the crack.
Hello, everybody, and welcome to Binary Revolution Radio, episode number 167.
I am StankDawg with you again this week, and we are coming to you on the 3rd of October, 2006.
Or whenever you actually downloaded this episode off of the podcast, or whatever you want to call it.
Vidcast, netcast, audiocast, radiocast, whatever your word of choice is, is all good with us.
And joining me this week on the show is a returning co-host, and actually, actually we'll turn this into an announcement on the show.
Our newest DDP member, Verbal, is on the show with us.
Welcome to the show, and welcome to DDP, Verbal.
Hey, thanks a lot.
Good morning, Norway.
How's it going over there?
All right.
I can tell you how it's going.
Cold.
Yeah, so I guess I'm in the DDP now.
Thanks for thanking all the other members for their support.
Thanks.
Much love.
Thanks for sending me the bag of money.
I appreciate that.
Always, always.
Let's do a little housekeeping.
Did you have, I'll let you go ahead and start off first.
What kind of housekeeping stuff do you have?
Yeah, I just want to mention, last week I kind of went to a little about the mentorship program,
and I was saying that, you know, we didn't have enough mentors, and we had like five,
six people that were still looking for someone.
And, you know, people actually, you know, came up and emailed me and, you know,
took up the spot to be a mentor.
And now we only have like two people that are not mentored.
So, you know, if you're out there listening and you feel like you have some, you know, something to contribute,
then, you know, please feel free to give me an email.
So I just wanted to mention that.
But the mentorship program is going really well, and I think people are enjoying themselves and learning a lot in the process.
Yeah, and I got to say, I'm really proud of how this has taken off because, you know,
this is something I've been wanting to do for a while and didn't have the time really to dedicate to get it off the ground,
and you've done a great job with it, but I really am surprised, in a good way, that so many people have volunteered to help out.
It's exceeded my expectations already, and it's just getting started.
So I really couldn't be more proud of the way this thing is getting started.
And I know that we have a few things on our plate to help get this a little bit more organized.
I guess we're going to be putting up a website and have some tools and some things on there that will help both the mentors and the mentees.
Am I correct with that?
Yeah, I mean, basically right now we're doing a little site that will make my life easier.
Let people who are interested in participating send mail or sign, like, do a form directly to me and, you know, whoever's running the thing.
So I don't have to sit there and manually, like, sort all the emails and stuff.
And also we add, like, a wiki and some other facilities for, you know, different pairs of people who are mentoring to kind of exchange information with each other
or just, you know, put whatever they're doing on a site, you know, on the Internet somewhere so that other people who may not have time to participate
or, you know, just for archival purposes in the future, like, all that will be documented.
So hopefully we'll kind of have, like, a flipbook or a scrapbook of all this stuff that, you know,
hopefully other people in the future will be able to draw from.
Yeah, and that's really cool to be able to – also, if, like, you're doing duplicate information, you know,
you might be able to share some programs or some sample code and things like that, which is cool.
You know what else I think is – I don't know if we've mentioned this before about the mentoring program,
but something else that's kind of cool is don't overlook the possibility of mentoring someone at your local BINREV meetings
or whatever meetings you have locally.
If you can actually get together with someone once a month face-to-face and sit down and do stuff and demo stuff on a laptop,
I mean, it's great doing it through email and through the global interweb and even phone calls if you're doing that.
But still, sitting down with someone, you know, sometimes you just can't beat that.
So if you actually are at a meeting, you know, don't feel afraid or don't be embarrassed or whatever to get together
or go to a meeting if you know there's someone there that can mentor you, you know,
and you've never been to a meeting before, by all means go because there is nothing but good things that can come out of it.
So that face-to-face thing is something else that I don't know if we've mentioned,
but it's certainly worth repeating if we have.
Also in the housekeeping and verbal, maybe you can speak to this as well,
but IRC is up and running, is that right?
We finally got that ironed out.
We had a few little bugs here and there with the servers, but that's all ready to go, right?
You can connect to irc.binrev.net.
Yeah.
We had kind of an old setup that we were changing over to a new set of servers.
So we kind of – because before we were at like an intermediate state
where we were using the old and the new servers and some of the things weren't syncing up,
but now we're completely moved over.
You can just connect to irc.binrev.net and it will connect you to an IRC server
and everything seems to be okay.
The only thing, however, is I apologize that if you already had a NIC registered,
you have to re-register again, but I mean this was probably as of last week.
So if you're using IRC regularly, you'd know about this,
but if you haven't and you go and try to register your NIC and it says your NIC's not registered,
you're going to have to re-register again because we couldn't reuse the database,
the services info.
But for that, I apologize.
But everything else, though, is going great and everything's working.
Now, you've also – I know you were going to, and actually I probably should have asked you this off the air,
but we're up on this final IRC daemon that we're going to use, right?
You were talking about switching.
Is that – are we sticking with the one we have now or are we going to, again, change in the future,
which is going to require people to re-register again?
No.
Yeah, I think, you know, the IRC daemon we're using now is fine.
You know, I haven't had any problems with it.
But some people before was mentioning that they want to switch to Unreal,
but to be honest, I don't really care, and, you know, the one we're using now works.
Yeah, I agree completely.
Right.
I mean, like, don't fix it if it's not broke.
Exactly, exactly.
All right, so, cool.
Register your NICs, irc.binrev.net.
All you'll have to remember is that one address, and to click the link,
if you just click on it from the home page or any of the Binrev pages,
it'll take you right to it, and it'll automatically pick one of the servers that are out there.
So we are in the process of getting some good, steady, reliable servers up and running.
And what the hell was that?
Okay, one of my boxes on the other side of the room just came alive, so it made a little noise.
So sorry about that.
Exterminate.
It's like, you know what?
I saw the preview for that Transformers movie to go completely off topic, which looks badass, by the way.
Dude, that, yeah, that movie looks awesome.
You know, I don't want to turn this into a movie review show, but we got the Transformers movie coming up.
We got the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles CGI coming up.
It's going to be a badass year for movies next year is all I'm saying.
Anyway, back to the show.
Oh, and I saw Jackass 2, which was hilarious.
Anyway, with the new IRC daemon, first of all, if anybody has a good, reliable server,
and what I mean by that is no cable modems, no DSL lines, no dynamic IP addresses of any kind,
even if you have a persistent one, I don't want that.
But if you've got a server out there, co-located, a dedicated server that you don't mind donating a little of the bandwidth
or just even as a backup, contact us and let us know, and we want to put a few more in there
just in case something does happen to some of them.
For the most part, what we have in place now is pretty doggone reliable,
but it's always best to have more, especially as we grow.
And speaking of growth, there are several channels that we have put out there, persistent channels,
consistent, I think persistent is a better word.
Persistent channels, for example, we created a pound code, C-O-D-E, which has been really, really,
even today, even, let's see, Monday afternoon, I got a lot of great information out there
about a project I was working on, some questions I had, all code-based stuff.
So we're kind of breaking stuff apart into different topical channels.
There's a pound freaking channel out there, and we're working on putting together a complete list
and kind of break things down by topic because, frankly, Pound Bin Rev, which is the main channel
we've always used in the past, has grown so much, and you've got 50 people in there
chatting about so many different things that it's pretty much a mess,
and it makes it difficult to actually concentrate on one conversation or any productive conversation.
So we're kind of breaking that down so that we're going to have a few official channels,
and we'll put up a website with a little bit more information about those.
And if you have an idea for a channel that you'd like to register, let us know.
Especially what I was thinking of is, like, the Bin Rev meetings.
If you're local BR, like for my BR 407, maybe we'll make a persistent channel for that
where we can get in there and plan about things we want to do at our upcoming meetings
or discuss when and where if we want to change meetings or different topics or what to bring,
that sort of thing.
So anything like that or any other group of any kind.
You've got a website out there, other hacking websites, hacking shows.
If you want to have an official IRC network and you don't already have one,
by all means contact us and we'll see what we can do about that.
And because, wow, we're taking more time in housekeeping than I expected,
but IRC is a good, I think that's a good, using the time to talk about IRC is a good thing.
Quickly, I'll mention that Dock Droppers is finally back up and running.
Thank you to people who emailed me and let me know it was down, but we were aware of it
and didn't even have time, unfortunately, to put up a page saying,
sorry, we're under construction.
I've been so busy, but that is back up and running again.
We were basically upgrading it to the latest version of MediaWiki
and had a few problems with the database changed in the new version,
so it kind of sort of worked, but it kind of sort of didn't.
None of the login or authentication worked anymore.
So we backed everything out.
We're back to square one.
We're still going to be upgrading it soon.
We're just going to have to approach it a little bit differently.
So right now it is back up and running.
So if you want to go back out there and make some changes, additions,
or comments or whatever to some of the content, by all means, feel free to do so.
And we are going to try to pick it up a little bit
and give time to our main topic that wrapped over from last week about IPv6.
So let's do some e-mail.
All right.
Our first e-mail.
There I go again.
I always say all right when I come out of a segment.
I'm so bad at this.
All right.
Our first e-mail this week comes from Iron Geek, long-time friend of BinRev.
Iron Geek says,
Hi, guys.
I'm guessing the second feature that Verbal is going to mention
is mandatory implementation of IPsec.
Your application does not have to use it,
but my understanding is IPsec has to be implemented in an IPv6 stack
to match the RFCs.
In IPv4, it's optional.
A few things IPsec provides are, and this is a blatant copy and paste from Wikipedia,
as he points out,
one, encrypting traffic so it can't be read in transmission,
two, integrity validation, ensuring the traffic hasn't been modified along the path,
three, authenticating the peers.
Both ends are sure they are communicating with a trusted entity in the traffic,
entity the traffic is intended for,
and four, anti-replay, protect against session replay.
Encryption on the network layer may slow some things down with the key exchange and all,
but for some things it should help a lot with security.
Thanks for the great show, guys, Iron Geek.
As a side note, could you plug the upcoming Freaknik X convention,
that's Freaknik 10, convention in Nashville?
A whole lot of us BinRevers will be there and plan to meet up.
So, yes, absolutely, Iron Geek.
Consider Freaknik plugged.
Go check out Freaknik.info is the website,
the only .info site that I know about, quite honestly,
P-H-R-E-A-K-N-I-C dot I-N-F-O.
So go check it out.
They've got the speaker list up, including Iron Geek himself.
I think several BinRevers, I think Lotec is speaking there.
Lotec and Nightlord, I think, are co-presenting on something.
My good friend Acidus is presenting on something that I know will be leet.
Desius has got a couple presentations going on.
Rattle is presenting.
Lots of great people presenting some great stuff.
So go check that out if you can make it to the Nashville area.
Okay.
As far as these other things, Verbal, do you want to –
should we hold off and do –
because we are going to talk about these things, right?
Yeah, let's wait until later in the actual main topic
and then I'll kind of refer back a little bit
because I'm going to go over it anyway.
Yeah, because, you know, and last week,
basically we had a little technical glitch,
so we had to chop the show into two portions,
which kind of threw off our timing.
So we ended up spending a lot more time on covert channels
and IPv4 a little bit than we should have.
So last week's show was really about covert channels
more than anything as a main topic.
So this week we're going to catch up and do the IPv6 stuff.
So we'll get to that in a few minutes.
Zip through some more emails.
Like this wonderful email.
Email from Tim who says, quote,
Motherfucking ad.
Fuck you, motherfu.
Let's go ride bikes.
End quote.
Now –
It's only ADD.
I don't know.
Is that what it is?
An ad works, too.
Motherfucking AD –
Okay, it is all caps.
ADD, I guess that's attention deficit disorder.
He's got it.
That explains a lot.
I have no –
and the subject line of this mail was,
it's not sexy if we don't hear the zip,
which of course made me think that this is prawn spam,
you know,
which of course I opened.
But there's no link –
there was no link inside.
Actually, I don't get a whole lot of spam on that account
because I don't really –
I mention it on the radio every single week, of course,
but I don't actually post it on the interweb very much.
So it doesn't get a whole lot of spam.
But there was no link in it,
and I'm not sure how to reply
or whether I should reply to this email.
So I guess I'll just say,
Tim, thanks for the email, I guess.
Yeah, that sounds about right.
All right.
Well, let's go on to the next one.
Oh, it came from Mike,
which makes a little bit more sense here.
Mike says,
Hey guys, great show.
I was turned on to you guys
by another great security podcast,
Paul.com Security Weekly.
Anyway, I just finished listening to episode 164,
and you mentioned that Yahoo!
you only use as SSL to transmit
the rest of the session –
only use as SSL to transmit,
then the rest of the session is unencrypted.
By default, Gmail is the same way.
However, if you type
HTTPS colon slash slash gmail.google.com,
the entire session is encrypted.
It would be better by default,
but at least it's there.
Great show.
Keep up the good work.
Now, I could have sworn
that we mentioned that
exact thing,
that by default it didn't,
but if you put in hard-coded that full path,
because I thought even Iron Geek
brought that up in an email,
and we verified it on the email.
Was that maybe an episode
after that or something?
Well, it depends on when you got it,
but the last episode,
we definitely talked about it
because Iron Geek emailed us.
Oh, okay.
Actually, his URL was
HTTPSmail.google.com.
I don't know if gmail.google.com works,
but I mean, one of those.
I don't know if it would work,
or I mean, both of them.
But, yeah.
But, I mean, it's cool.
Just to rehash,
because I think a lot of people
don't really know about it.
Right.
Because they just type in gmail.com,
and then they go.
Yeah, and this is probably
a case of timing of the emails
crossing, that's all.
So, that makes perfect sense.
And, you know,
the reason they do this
by default, too,
is, and just in case
I didn't mention this,
when you're encrypting everything,
you're adding a little bit of overhead
to every single packet.
I mean, every single thing
is encrypted, which adds,
I mean, anytime you encrypt a file,
it's going to usually get,
even if it's just a little bit,
a little bit bigger,
especially when you break it down
packet by packet,
it just increases the traffic.
Now, when it's just you,
it's not such a big deal.
But I think I saw,
oh my gosh,
I should have ripped it out
of the magazine,
how many users that,
like, for example,
Yahoo Mail has,
and Gmail has,
so many users,
that that adds up
quicker than you might realize.
So, that's probably the reason
they don't put it on
by default,
is because it just adds
so much bandwidth,
although Google really doesn't,
I don't think bandwidth
is really a concern of theirs,
but generally,
when you're running
your own server,
that's always a concern,
or a point of knowledge,
a point of attention.
Ah, anyway.
And actually, Verbal,
I'm going to throw this
at you, by the way,
because I'm not a fan
of Gmail,
I'm not a fan of Google,
but that's a whole
other side story.
Um, I actually logged
into my Gmail account today
to send an email to Verbal,
and first time
in a couple of months,
probably,
I've really logged into it
for any length,
you know,
I might have jumped on,
sent something,
and jumped off,
but I actually got in there
and looked,
and my Gmail account,
which, let me emphasize,
I never use,
I've never registered
on a website with it,
I've never posted it publicly,
my Gmail account,
if you go Google
for my Gmail account,
you won't find it,
yet somehow,
there are 1,117 messages
in the spam folder,
so somehow,
it's out there.
So what do you think
about that?
Is Google selling
these addresses out there?
Because there's no way
that I've released
that anywhere.
No, I mean,
Google is definitely
not selling your information.
Like, um,
I know a lot of people
who work there,
and, I mean,
I've had many conversations
with those people,
and they try very hard
to not do creepy stuff.
Like, if they wanted to,
they can, you know,
like, they have everything
you do logged,
and if they wanted to,
they can, like,
do all sorts of, like,
creepy shit to you.
I know.
But, I mean,
they make it a point
to try not to be evil.
Now, like,
a lot of people
I've told that to,
yeah, whatever,
they have it,
there's no reason
why they wouldn't use it.
Now, whether you believe
that or not,
you know,
that's up to you.
But, from what I've seen,
they try not to,
you know,
abuse the information
they gather from you.
Now, the other thing
as to why, you know,
you might be getting spam
is that, um,
like, a lot of spam people,
I think one of the things
they do is they'll
enumerate accounts.
So, let's say, uh,
what was the name
of your,
that Gmail account?
Like, was it
spankdog at gmail.com?
Yes, it was.
Right.
So, you know,
if I were a spammer,
not that I am,
but I would probably,
you know,
if I'm finding
legitimate accounts,
you know,
from wherever,
I would probably just
try to send it to,
you know,
that username
at gmail.com too
because they probably
have an account.
Like, for example,
my Gmail address
is verbal at gmail.com.
So, maybe that's
what's happening.
But how are they
finding the account name?
You know,
Google is putting it
out there
for other people
to find, you know?
But how are they
getting the account name even?
Well, I mean,
you have other
stankdog at accounts,
right?
So, you're saying
that they know,
they're finding,
for example,
stankdog at stankdog.com
and they're saying,
you know what,
let's just go ahead
and also send
to stankdog at gmail
and stankdog at yahoo
and stankdog at hotmail
and assume that he might
have one or all
three of them.
Probably.
I mean,
that's what I would do.
I mean,
it doesn't cost me
anything.
They just keep sending,
you know?
It's not practical
for me to enumerate
the entire alphabet
or the entire ASCII space
but if I know
someone has that name
and they probably
have it,
I mean,
and you do,
and you do
and I do
and a lot
of other people
I know do.
I mean,
people like to keep
one username
for all their emails,
you know?
That's just my hypothesis.
I could be,
I mean,
I'm totally talking
out of my ass
but that seems
to make sense to me.
Well,
the Hotmail,
my Hotmail account
is so overrun with spam
that I never use
that anymore.
So if anybody's ever
emailed me at that
and I never responded,
it's not because
I'm a dick,
it's because I don't
use it anymore.
It's dead.
Or it might be
because I'm a dick.
One of the two things.
Yahoo,
don't have,
and Gmail have it
but barely ever use it.
So,
StankDog.
If you want,
right?
Just get StankDog
at Yahoo.com
and then see
what comes in.
Yeah.
It's probably,
and actually there might,
I don't know.
It might be,
maybe I have it
and don't remember.
I don't know
what I've got anymore.
I don't use it
if I've got it.
I'll say that.
All right.
Let's move on here.
How about you
take over some email
for a minute
and let me have
a nice sip
of my sweet iced tea.
Sweet iced tea.
That's not so.
Okay.
Next email
is from Jason.
Jason writes,
Verbal,
No,
bang,
don't support
the evil empire
of Apple,
period.
They cheat developers.
They misrepresent facts
with their marketing.
They're locking people
into their products
with DRM.
They're unethical
and a typical corporation
exemplifying
what is wrong
in America
and the world.
For a buyer
revolution person,
why are you not
supporting the
OSS movement?
Even if there are
rough edges
here and there
that have not
been addressed
by developers
quite yet.
Well,
hold on.
Let me defend you
real quick
because there's
a jump between
the first paragraph
and the second paragraph
big time.
Just because
we had that little
discussion about Apple
which I knew
that was going
to come back.
I knew it was
when I asked you
the question.
Very much
we,
and I think
I'm speaking
for Verbal
and I'm speaking
for most hackers
when I say this,
very much support
open source software
and we've always,
always supported
open source software
from the first episode
of this show
even further back.
I mean,
we've always been
big, big supporters
of open source software
and turned people
on to open source software
all the time.
I don't think
that's any way,
shape, or form
related
to his first comments
about Mac
and Apple.
Now,
it just so happens
I do kind of agree
with some of his views
on Apple
but you don't.
So let's not,
I'll defend you
and say you're not
not supporting
the open source
software movement
so I'll step into
that part.
Now,
I don't know
if you wanted
to follow up
on the Apple
part of it or not
but it's,
the floor is yours.
That's such a
bittersweet defense
you ask.
I don't,
I'm sorry,
I don't agree
with you on Apple.
I really don't.
Yeah,
so in my own defense,
now like,
the thing is
I do use,
you know,
open source software.
If you,
you know,
I mean,
obviously you don't
know me that well
and that's,
you know,
that's to be expected
but I,
you know,
OS X is not
the only thing
I run.
Like,
I try to use
the correct tool
for the correct purpose
and,
you know,
and instead of just
like picking one
and then saying like,
okay,
I'm going to use it
for everything.
So just to give,
you know,
a brief overview,
like,
for example,
I have,
for my,
like,
firewalls
and if I'm,
I used to have
like a computer
as a router
but now I don't
I have some Cisco bugs
but,
you know,
for that stuff
I use OpenBSD
because I like PF
and,
you know,
I think,
I'm going to get
shit to saying this
but I think
OpenBSD
is more secure
by default
than some of the other OSes
which I know
is not really true
to an extent
but with the way
it's packaged
and,
you know,
compared to other distros
it's just kind of
like a bare bones thing
and it does what I want
and,
you know,
I've been using it
for a while
so that's just what I know
for like if I want
to use firewall
or,
you know,
some router.
Now,
if I want,
personally,
I like to use FreeBSD
actually back
in like the 4X days
you know,
because 5X is kind of messed up
and I haven't really
tried 6X yet
but like if I have a box
that I want to use
as like a server
then I,
you know,
then I would use FreeBSD
and like the problem
with,
you know,
this like kind of like
picking which OS to use
kind of for me anyway
comes from the desktop.
Like I've been,
I've spent a ton of time
trying to find
a good desktop OS
and,
you know,
long story short
ultimately I sold on OS X
because it kind of
gave me
enough power
to do everything
I wanted
and it had
the kind of
code quality
for the UI
that I was looking for,
you know,
like you were mentioning
about the rough edges,
you know,
and it's also
easy to use
and there are
third party,
you know,
not open source
applications.
Now,
I have no problem
with buying
and paying
for an application
if it does
what I want
and it's reasonably priced.
Absolutely.
Right.
So,
for example,
you know,
for like GIMP
or Adobe Photoshop
or whatever,
you know,
like GIMP is a good
replacement but
it doesn't compare
to Photoshop at all.
Like,
if you need to do
some serious
like photo editing
and stuff like that,
you know,
GIMP does not compare.
You are so asking
for hate mail.
Yeah,
whatever.
I don't care.
I'm putting myself
up there.
I'm not disagreeing
necessarily.
The thing is,
you know,
with all of Apple's
shit,
they make it
products that I like.
So,
to be honest,
I don't really care
if they're like
that evil
and I think
in my opinion
that they're less evil
than some other vendors.
Google.
Woo!
I'm going to go
duck now.
Yeah,
exactly.
I'm not saying
I necessarily disagree
with you.
I'm just saying,
yeah,
we're going to get,
we're going to catch
hell for that one.
Yeah,
whatever.
Listen,
I brought this up.
I brought this up
last week too.
I mean,
I do like
what I've seen
and I do have
limited experience
admittedly with OSX
and I threw out there
the idea of,
yeah,
OSX is great
but that doesn't
justify the hardware
that costs twice as much
as the PC equivalent.
You know,
that's my problem.
It's more on the hardware
end than anything.
That's my personal problem.
I think they overprice it.
And you know what?
Let's go on
to the next email
because it's also
related to this.
So,
do you want to take this one
since you're on a roll?
Yeah.
Oh,
actually,
before I move on,
it's kind of ironic,
well,
not ironic,
but it's coincidental
that last,
so this weekend
I was at Torcon
and the new OSX 1010.48 upgrade
came out
and I'm like,
oh,
okay,
I'm not doing anything.
I'm just sitting here
on the couch
so I upgraded
and after I upgraded
and this is not the first time
that it's happened,
it's up,
it fucked up
my NetInfo database
and I couldn't log in
and this was like Saturday.
Apple is so wonderful.
Yeah,
and like,
this has happened before
and you know,
you go online
and you look
and it's like,
yeah,
if this happens
then follow these steps
to rebuild your NetInfo database.
Oh,
and by the way,
NetInfo is like
what OSX 10 uses
for its like
password stuff.
I mean,
it's basically
an Etsy password
but with more info in it
and you can do more with it.
Aside from that.
All right,
way to preach the...
I rebuilt it
and it doesn't work
and for the whole weekend
at Toricon
I couldn't log into my laptop
and yeah,
and I got home
and I just immediately
reformatted.
This is a great...
Oh,
there's more.
And that's what I also did
while I was reformatting
my laptop,
I ordered a ThinkPad T60.
Yeah,
you know,
you're really not doing
a good job
of pimping out
how great the Mac is
with stories like that,
you know?
Dude,
whatever.
I'm not pimping anything.
I'm just saying,
you're not doing
a good defense.
I use what I use.
So I'm going to end up
selling my MacBook,
I think,
and just use it
for a while.
Yes!
Oh,
that was awesome.
Anyway.
I still stand by
everything I said
about Apple.
Right,
but you're going to sell it,
sure,
okay.
Why don't you read
the next email?
You're digging yourself
so deep
that I don't know
if they make ladders
that tall now.
Okay.
The next email
is from
Zed
Senthau.
He says,
I have a quick question
for you.
I've been in IT,
I've been involved
in IT
for many years now
as a service engineer
often install
Windows networks
and use the dreaded
Microsoft apps
and OS every day.
But a few years ago,
I decided to try out
an Apple Mac
and now would never
use anything else
at home.
Not having to worry
about viruses
and spyware
as a bonus
when surfing
dodgy sites,
but the reliability
of everything Mac
just makes me
sure that I'll
stick with my Apple.
On the odd occasion
I've heard
that
Mac and radio
is more often
than Mac
disrespected.
Why?
Why not have a session
on the radio
about
and tags
of owning a Mac
and its uses
or uselessness
in the world
of the hacker?
Well,
that's it for now.
Take care and best wishes
from South Wales
in the UK.
All right.
You kind of broke up
on us there,
so let me repeat
just those last couple
of sentences
from this end
because I'm not sure
if they came through,
but it said,
on the odd occasions
I've heard anyone
mention Mac
on BinRev Radio,
it's more often
than not disrespected.
And why?
Why not have a session
on BinRev Radio
about the plus
and negs
of owning a Mac
and its uses
or uselessness
in the world
of the hacker?
So that was really
the gist of his email
shortened.
I think we kind of
just went into this,
and I want to hurry up
and get through this email,
but I think Jason
from the previous letter
answered it pretty well
from my standpoint,
the proprietary.
I can sum it up
in one quick sentence
that it's proprietary,
overpriced,
underpowered hardware
and software.
That period.
That simple.
And actually,
I'll even be willing
to take out the software
and just say,
proprietary,
overpriced,
underpowered hardware.
That is my big beef
with Apple.
And you know what?
That's just my opinion.
There's nothing necessarily
wrong with that
as a business practice
as the way they want
to do this.
You want to make
proprietary software?
That's fine,
but I'm not going to fall
for this marketing bullshit
and all this money
they put into commercials
and advertising,
which is probably why
they have to raise
the price so much.
But there's a reason
they only have 5%
of the PC market.
There's only,
they don't have the sales
that IBM clones
or PC clones
or whatever you want
to call it.
IBM made the same mistake
when the PC first came out.
They tried to make
proprietary hardware
and then all of a sudden
Dell came out
and Gateway came out
and all these other
companies came out
and all these clones
started,
and they just blew
them right away.
They completely destroyed
them in the PC market.
Same thing happened then.
Mac gets away with it
because they have done
some very innovative things.
I will not take that
away from them,
but they just want
too much control over it.
They're trying to double dip
on the hardware
and the software
and the digital rights
management
and the intellectual property
and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
I don't know.
I think we've beaten it to death.
I know that we've done
episodes on Mac
and Mac OS X
and discussed it
very early,
like Season 1,
Season 2.
I'm pretty sure we had
Logan 5 on.
We've talked about it.
I'm certain we've beaten
this topic to death.
Cypher X,
I know it was on,
talked about it,
so I don't know.
I don't want to...
I think we've already
done enough on Mac
for this episode.
What do you think?
Yeah, I think it was
that's funny.
I think I'm never...
Alright, you sound
completely like a
fucking transformer
right now,
so I'm going to pretend
you didn't say anything
because I don't know
what the hell you said anyway
and give you time
to go open a window,
hang your head out
or something
and get a signal
on that shitty phone
of yours
and I'm going to go ahead
and read this last email
quickly.
Can you hear me okay?
I can barely hear you.
Oh, your phone
is the suck sore
and you suck at the online.
The last...
Hey, I'm back.
I'm back.
Alright, there you go.
I threw my head
out the window
and I'm back.
Alright, well then
can you read the last email
or do you want me to?
No, I got it.
I got this.
He's hanging out the window
on one leg.
The last email
is from Gerald.
Gerald or something.
I can't read.
It's okay.
Well, first of all...
Well, first of all,
I just wanted to say
I love the show.
I would like to recommend
HackinMedia.org
to your listeners
who crave more shows
like this one.
I know that it is
part of the DDP
but there might
be a few listeners
who don't know about it.
Also, I want to recommend
the Backtrack Live CD Distro
for those who want
to try out a few
of the open source tools
you guys covered.
Backtrack is
a result of
WAX and Auditor
being combined
and could be found
at remote-exploit.org.
All right.
Yeah, I mean,
definitely, like,
HackinMedia.org
is awesome
and if you don't
know about it,
you know,
definitely check it out.
They have a lot of shows,
a lot of quality shows
that if you enjoy this one
that you would probably
like also.
And also,
thanks for talking
about Backtrack.
I mean,
I've used Backtrack
and Auditor
and, you know,
they're both
actually very quality
live distro CDs
for doing pen testing
and all of that stuff.
Definitely check it out
if you want to play around
with, you know,
just running some tools
and seeing how they work.
Yeah, good stuff.
I mean,
we've definitely mentioned
all of those sites
on the show before.
Also,
not only HackinMedia.org
but if you like
this type of show,
check out
ddphackradio.org
which is a streaming
radio station
24-7
playing reruns
of BinRev Radio,
playing a lot
of other great shows.
A scheduling list
is on the front page
of that.
So,
if you want to sit
and listen at work
and things like that
and your headphones,
of course,
because I like to drop
the F-bomb
for those who don't
already know.
Definitely worth repeating
and mentioning them.
Now,
we are going to go
into our main topic.
We've got about,
I don't know,
40 minutes total
left.
So,
let's try to
quickly go over
IPv4
enough to,
because we need to set
the table a little bit
before we go into
IPv6.
As much as we'd like
to dive into it,
we do need to talk
about IPv4.
So,
I want to briefly,
just a few minutes,
go through
at least some of the
main points that are
going to come into play
again in IPv6,
specifically like the
class ABCD address
structure that's in
place.
With IPv4,
you have the four
octets of numbers
that we're all used
to in your address.
And,
class A is anything
with that first
number,
for example,
I don't know,
117.x.x.x,
which is a class A
address that means
you have 117.0.0.1,
all the way
through 117.255.255.255.255,
for example.
That's important
because basically
what you realize is
with a class A
address,
you have the
flexibility of three
different numbers in
there,
which gives you a
huge number of IP
addresses available to
you.
So,
class A addresses
are reserved for
large backbone
providers,
large ISPs,
usually big telcos.
I don't know,
any other examples
you can think of
a class A addresses,
universities,
maybe,
I don't even think
universities really
get them,
do they?
No,
like,
class A is reserved
for people with
the money and power
and,
you know,
who are around
enough,
like,
long ago enough
to reserve them.
I mean,
you really can't
get into class A
anymore,
but like,
the military
probably has some,
and,
yeah,
that's about it.
Yeah,
good point.
I didn't think
military governments
probably got some
of them.
And,
you know,
if they show
a reason,
a lot of them
were assigned
earlier,
right,
but some of them
have been reassigned
and stuff.
If you show a reason
that you need,
like,
for example,
let's say,
I don't know,
Bell South,
again,
for example,
they may have
class A,
I'm not sure
if they do or not,
if somebody can
confirm that,
but I'll email us,
but they may have
a class A address
because they,
it's known that
they have a lot
of users,
business and
residential,
that they're going
to need a lot
of IP addresses
so they can
justify getting
a class A address
assigned to them
or approved for them.
And as you go down
through those
classes of address,
B would be
a fixed first node,
their first octet
would be,
say,
176 dot,
and then you'll get
one class second node
assigned to you,
like 180,
I don't know,
I'm making up numbers,
which I hope I don't
accidentally use a
reserved one,
as an idiot,
dots X dot X.
So you don't have
as many as a class A,
but you still have
a large block.
And I've worked
for places that have
had class B addresses
before,
you still get a lot
of freaking addresses
on there.
And anyway,
to summarize,
the further you go
down there,
class C has even
fewer addresses,
and so on and so forth.
So I think,
keep that in mind
because that does,
that is one of the
problems with IPv4
is you have a
limited number.
You have those
four octets,
it's a 32-bit
address range,
which means
you can only
have numbers
up to a certain
size,
certain length,
255.
And because of that,
you're limited to
about 4.2,
4.3 billion
possible addresses.
And I kind of made
one metaphor to
phone numbers
last week
as far as routing,
and we're not going
to talk about routing
too much here on
IPv4,
but another similarity
to phone numbers
is how we run out
of unique phone numbers
as cities begin to
grow.
And they end up
having to branch off
and create a new
area code within a
city as it grows
because they've run
out of unique numbers
to assign to people
for phone numbers.
And they begin
reusing them and
things like that.
So it's a similar
problem.
You have a limited
number of unique
numbers that you can
use,
whether it's phone
number or IPv4 IP
addresses.
So that is one of
the,
and probably the
primary driver.
That's an opinion,
but I mean,
would you agree
that's the primary
reason that the
push to IPv6 is
really going,
getting pushed?
Yeah,
I mean,
definitely.
Well,
at least initially
because everyone's
been complaining
about,
you know,
like,
oh,
we're going to
run out of
addresses,
you know,
in like two years.
They were saying
that in like 98
or whatever.
But now that,
you know,
people are using
that,
then that's not
really kind of
an argument anymore.
But,
you know,
there are some
other stuff,
but that was
definitely,
I think,
one of the main
motivations.
Well,
and that.
Because the thing
is,
you know,
if you see like,
oh,
okay,
32 bits is what,
like 4.2 billion.
And like,
that's,
you know,
that's not that much,
but it's still decent.
But keep in mind
that a lot of those
you can't use,
you know,
like a lot of those
ranges are reserved
for stuff.
And also,
you end up with,
you know,
no matter what you do,
really,
you end up with
a fragmentation.
So like,
let's say you give
an ISP a Class A,
right?
Right.
They're not going
to have,
you know,
they're not going
to have every single
one of those
being used
because,
you know,
they're going
to save some
for future customers
or they just,
you know,
have a Class A
and they're just
sitting on it.
So that means
other people
can't use those
possible available
addresses.
So,
you know,
a lot of fragmentation
goes there.
And then when you
get to Class B,
you end up,
you know,
so Class A
is like,
what,
$16 million?
And like,
Class B,
you jump from
$16 million
to like $65,000.
So,
you know,
you lose a lot
just,
you know,
by jumping
from Class A
to B.
Right.
And there aren't
that many
Class A
addresses,
address families.
And you mentioned
that,
which is,
so basically,
the primary driving
reason,
in my opinion,
is the sheer
number,
the limit,
because NAT
is a temporary
solution in that
you are assigning
internal addresses
behind the scenes
and letting your
own equipment
route everything
to one IP address
that you get assigned
by your ISP,
for example.
And that way,
you don't need
a unique IP address
for each machine
internally to your
network.
You let your own
equipment handle
all that switching
and you don't need
to have a unique
IP address for each
one of them.
However,
wouldn't it be nice
if you did
and yes,
so it's a temporary
solution and it
does get the job
done for like
browsing the web
and things like that,
but it makes it a
little bit tougher
if you wanted to
set up a server
inside of there.
You'd have to do
a whole lot of
port redirection
and lots of
messy things.
They work,
but they're just
not ideal.
They're fixes.
They're patches
is what they are.
They're just quick
fixes to get a
goal accomplished.
So switching to
IPv4,
or excuse me,
switching from
IPv4 to
IPv6 will
change
from a 32-bit
to a 128-bit,
and I'm going to
let you talk more
about this because
I am not
that well versed.
I'm very limited
in my knowledge
of IPv6 yet
because it's still
in the process
of rolling out,
but it gives you
a lot more
addresses,
which is the
primary reason,
but there's also
a lot of others,
and even Iron Geek
referred to some
of them in the
email earlier
that you're going
to talk about
as well.
So I think
that's good
on recapping
IPv4.
I think we've
got the main
points of that
down,
unless there's
anything you
wanted to add
to that,
and kind of
move into
IPv6.
We've got
about...
Yeah, so
IPv6,
I'm going to
just quickly
go over all
the stuff
that I did
last time
so I don't
do the same
show twice.
Right, well
let me tell you
here, we've got,
let's see,
we're about
45,
approximately 45
minutes into the
show, so
we've got a
good 30
minutes or so
to dedicate
to this.
Okay, cool.
In that case,
actually, let me
back up a second
and let me rant
about Nat a
little bit.
I don't know
how much of
this said last
show, but
you mentioned
that Nat is
like a temporary
solution and a
patch and
whatever, but
the problem is
people who are
in support of
Nat for their
own reasons,
are kind of
touting it as
a new
feature,
not a quick
fix, it's
not to extend
the usage of
address spaces,
and they're
kind of giving
that some
benefits and
saying, oh,
we actually want
this, and one
of the things I
went to about
last time is
better security,
and to me,
that makes no
sense because
why don't you
use a firewall
or something
because if you
have Nat and
host, so
basically if you
have a Nat,
you can't have
outside connections
coming into
boxes behind the
Nat without
specific port
forwarding being
set up on the
box that's doing
the Nat, but
that sort of
hiding doesn't
really do
anything, it's
one of those
security through
obscurity things.
Right, but it
doesn't hurt,
it doesn't hurt,
so it's not a
bad thing, but
certainly don't
rely on that as
the sole method
of security.
Right, but the
thing I want to
stress is you're
breaking the
internet.
internet, like
the internet, you
are breaking the
motherfucking
internet.
Like I was
saying last time,
you know, the
people who design
the thing and
all of the way
that protocols are
set up and the
stack is set up,
you're supposed to
have N10
connectivity, and
if you don't,
you're making this
like little re-re
version of the
internet that
does, you know,
where a lot of
things don't work
and you have to
spend the manpower
to fix it.
Like, so at
school, I actually
did research for
the guy who
invented that, his
name is Paul
Francis, and, you
know, in class and
like wherever I see
him, we just have
these like long
arguments over V6
versus that, and
you know, and
obviously he's going
to like it because
he invented it, but
a lot of people
share his point of
view in which, you
know, we're just
saying like, oh,
NAT is great for
reasons A, B, C,
and D, but then,
you know, we don't
care that it doesn't
work and it breaks
stuff, we'll just
spend our grant
money, you know, and
our research time to
like work around
those and, you
know, so we can
publish more
papers to get
around those when
you can actually be
doing something else
interesting.
Now, having said
that though, nothing
prevents you from
using NAT in V6.
Right, I was
getting ready to ask
that.
You can still use
NAT.
Yeah, I was getting
ready to ask that
very question.
First of all, NAT is
kind of cool in what
it does.
Don't get me wrong, it
is a cool solution to
the problem, but it's
certainly no reason to
say, let's just stick
with that and not move
to IPv6.
That's ridiculous.
NAT is a cool
solution, I do like it,
but it does have
limitations, and that's
assuming, first of all,
A, that's putting the
burden of hardware on the
consumer to have to
buy and maintain and
deal with their own
stuff, and not
everybody can do that,
has the ability to set
that up in their house
and do their own NAT,
et cetera, et cetera.
I mean, I do it, and
most, a lot of our
listeners, I'm sure, do
it, but you don't
expect your grandmother
to do that, and, you
know, as we change and
evolve and have these
new products coming up,
more things want or
need, or I should say
will excel in having
their own dedicated IP
address that you don't
have to worry about
configuring and setting up
an internal network
and whatnot, and I
mean, just cell phones
and other things are
just touching the
surface.
I mean, there's so
many things that if we
have unique addresses,
and we talked last week
about some of the math
of how many 50 octillion
addresses or whatever we
came to the conclusion,
we can assign address to
everything, and you don't
have to worry about all
the maintenance and the
hardware and the manpower,
the hours that go into
it, or woman power, as if
there's any women
listening to the show,
but we won't rehash that
topic anymore, what a
sausage party this show
is.
So, you know, I
understand and support
Nat for a solution to
the problem at hand, but
there's no way that I
could ever defend that
to say, let's not move to
IPv6 because we've got
Nat.
That, to me, is just
ludicrous.
Yeah, I mean, well, see,
the thing is, not
everyone is saying, like,
well, okay, we understand
there are limitations to
V4, but V6 sucks a lot
too, so we don't want to
move to it.
But, you know, that's
another point of view, and
it's like, you might be
right, but, you know, I
think that it's good
enough, and it'll, like,
kind of be, like, the
better of two evils, sort
of speak, you know?
But, anyway, let's move
on to more technical
stuff, instead of me just
ranting about random
shit.
Well, actually, there was
one, you kind of brought
this question up, and I
don't know if we answered
it, or if you finished on
it, but you were saying
that you can still use
Nat in IPv6, correct?
Yeah, yeah, no, I mean,
definitely.
I mean, all Nat is is just
a multi-spark thing and
demark thing, where you
keep track, you know, you
have hosts all sending,
you know, you have a
separate network, and
basically multiplex that
network's traffic from one
box, and you just, like,
use the ports as the way
to identify, you know, to
identify which box that's
NATed behind you is using
which connection.
So, I mean, all Nat does is
multiplex your traffic, and
you're using ports to
identify which box is
behind you in the internal
traffic, and the internal
network, are, you know,
are matched with what
connections are going out.
I mean, it has nothing to
do with V4 and V6.
You can use it in the new
V6, and it'll work the same
way.
So, if you want to use Nat
for security, I mean, go
right ahead.
But if your grandmother tries
to send you, you know, a
picture of her cat's birthday
party or whatever, then you
might not be able to get it
because you're behind a
NAT.
I love pictures of cat
birthday parties, by the
way.
I love them.
Cat birthday parties?
Yeah, good.
That's a good point.
But also, at the same time,
because you have so many
addresses, you really don't
need NAT, ironically.
Sure, if you wanted, you
could probably still do it,
but you really wouldn't
need it.
So, let's focus on some of
the specific IPv6 features,
I guess, if you will.
Is that probably the next
direction we want to take?
We've probably got, like,
what, 20-some minutes
left?
Yeah, let's go for it.
So, let's now take the
chance to touch back on
what Iron Keep is saying.
He was mentioning that
IPsec is mandatory in
IPv6 now.
Well, what is IPsec?
Back up.
What is IPsec?
IPsec is an encryption
layer for layer 3.
So, if you listen to the
tunneling episode that we
did, I mentioned that
IPsec was one of the ways
you can use to, you know,
to do VPN.
Right.
And, right.
So, IPsec is just an
encryption protocol for layer
3.
So, now, you know, so it's
not, okay, so I think
everyone's familiar with
SSL.
SSL is not a layer 3.
IPsec, and if you're, you
know, looking at the SSL
traffic, you can tell where
it's coming to and from,
like the source and
destination IP.
Right.
But, with IPsec, it's kind
of one layer lower, so you
actually, you know, don't
know where traffic's going to
and from.
And, so the point is that
IPsec is mandatory when you
implement the Vsec stack on,
like, a host or a router.
Right.
You don't have to use it, but
it's mandatory in the host
stack, according to the RFC.
Okay.
And, you know, you're
saying if you use, if you
use IPsec or if you use SSL,
then you're going to have, you
know, an overhead.
But, since that service is
always there, it's just going
to make things easier for
people to, you know, to
implement IPsec in their
protocols and in their
applications.
All right.
Right.
So, I mean, you know, so
that's what people mean when
they say, like, oh, you
know, V6 is more secure
because it has IPsec.
And then, you know,
immediately, some other
people are like, wait a
minute, well, you can do
IPsec in V4, so what do you
mean?
And all they mean is just
that the RFC says you must
implement this.
So, no matter which V6 stack
you're using, IPsec will be
there and you don't have to
install anything else.
Right.
So, it's part of the
standard.
Right.
And it's required.
Okay.
So, that's all fine and
dandy.
But, and actually, I kind of
have a, I had a question
pop into my head.
I'm going to go ahead and
ask it.
Hopefully, it doesn't take
too long.
With IPsec, does that make
it more difficult to
intercept, well, I'm not
even sure how to phrase
it.
We all know that the
government, we know what
Tor does and how it
protects the packets
destination, source to
destination by handing them
off so many times, it makes
it difficult to trace
something back.
Is IPsec going to function
similarly?
Not as far as using onion
routing per se, but will
it have a kind of a similar
effect in that someone
anywhere in the middle
would be able to pick that
up?
They wouldn't know who the
originating requester was or
the site that they're
requesting is or am I way
off base here?
Well, I mean, yes and no.
Let's say I make an IPsec
connection from point A to
point B. You can figure out
relatively easily, you can
figure out who's talking, but
you don't exactly, it depends
on my own work and I really
don't want to get too much
into it because it's not a
show of IPsec, but the
important thing is that if
you use IPsec, people can't
do man-in-the-middle attacks
and replay attacks because
layer 3 is encrypted.
Well, I mean, that's not the
only reason, but, you know,
layer 3 and up are encrypted
so people are not going to be
able to replay the packets and
they're not going to be able to
do a man-in-the-middle.
So, it's really to prevent
forgery more than anything.
Right.
Okay.
So, you're not going to be
anonymous.
Right.
So, it's not going to be like
Tor where supposedly you're
anonymous.
Right.
Gotcha.
Okay.
All right.
What else is it bringing?
Sorry?
What else is IPv6 bringing?
Right.
So, one of the other big things
is, you know, they want it to be
used.
So, they have this new concept
called stateless auto
configuration.
Now, in V4, if you want to,
so the method that you get in IP
is you can configure statically
or you can use DHCP, and I think
most of our listeners are
familiar with that.
Right.
And DHCP, just to quickly go
over, is you send out a
broadcast request and there's a
router or DHCP server on your
LAN segment that is
responsible for giving you IP.
And you send out a request and
then you get an IP back.
And, you know, there are also
some other fields.
But that's kind of like the
default setup right now.
Now, in V6, you don't need to
have a server sitting there
listening to requests and then
handing out IPs.
They have, what you do is a host
is going to send a link local
multicast request for
configuration information.
And now, if the router, like the
first hop router supports it, and
it should because it's in the RFC,
it's going to reply with a router
advertisement, you know, that has
the network layer configuration for
the host.
Now, you know, so the good thing,
I mean, it's pretty obvious that
you don't have to run a separate
application level server to do this.
And your router will automatically
do this.
So if, you know, your Joe Blow, like,
V6 Linksys router or whatever will
have this supported, then it doesn't
have to implement DHCP.
Now, having said that, DHCP V6
also exists.
And, you know, some people might be
like, well, why do you have DHCP?
You'll have, you know, that link local
multicast thing that you can do to get
an IP.
Now, DHCP has more features.
You know, you don't just get an IP.
You can specify, like, you know,
permission stuff and, like, lease
times and all this junk.
But, you know, it just depends on
what you want.
But basically, you don't have to use
it if you don't want to.
I was going to say, I mean, does,
so, this is kind of like Nat.
It can still exist, but is there
really a need for it?
Well, I mean, to be honest, I don't
really know.
You know, we would probably be better
off to ask someone who works in
IP, who has to, like, deal with this
stuff on a day-to-day basis.
So, you know, he or she can tell us,
like, you know, is there any
advantages of using DHCP now that
you have auto-configuration things
in place?
Right.
I'm not sure I see it there, but,
and I don't know that, the thing
is, well, I don't want to interrupt
you.
I've got a lot of questions I can
throw at you, so I'll let you keep
going, and you give me a sign when
you're done, and I'll throw a bunch,
I got a bunch of questions for you.
Okay, okay.
Yeah, no problem.
So, just more things, more features
for IPv6 is, you get jumbo frames,
and that means that your payload can be
larger than 64 kilobytes.
I mean, that's a good thing, just because
you get to send more traffic per packet,
so that means that over time, your header
overhead will be less.
Now, this actually depends on each hop.
Now, if I send, you know, it's just like
the MTU right now.
If I send a packet from A to B, the MTU is
going to be that of the smallest MTU per
link on the way.
So, if you have jumbo frames, you need
every single hop from A to B to support
that, else, you know, your packet can only
be as big as the smallest link without,
you know, chopping it up.
So, hopefully, the ISP and stuff will
support this, so people can, you know,
get bigger pipes to their home and also
benefit from it by having bigger packets.
Well, now, but if we step back, you know,
and if you apply networking theory,
the larger the packet size, theoretically,
you increase the chance of having bad or
corrupted data in that packet, because
you've got more data, so you have a
higher chance of it being corrupted.
Is that a negligible amount, then, that
probably won't make, I mean, it's still
so unlikely that it's not an issue?
Well, no, I mean, you have a CRC, right?
Right.
So, if you get, you know, so if there's
something wrong with your packet, you can
correct it.
You can correct it anyway.
And also, so from the map point of view,
I think your rate of, like, having a bad
packet and having to resend.
So, what you're saying is, if the packet's
bigger, and one of those packets, you know,
have an error in it, and I have to resend,
then, you know, that's just, like, waste.
But the thing is, I think if you take the
percentage of bad packets that have to be
retransmitted, compared to the overhead of the
headers that you save, by making the packets
bigger, I think you're going to come out on top.
That's a good point, too, yeah.
So, even if it, I would suspect that it's just
a negligible amount anyway, but, yeah, that's
a definite point.
The savings that you would get from the
overhead of the headers would more than make
up for it, even if there is a small increase.
Yeah, that makes perfect sense.
All right.
So, let me keep going, then.
Okay, so, if you actually look at, like, a
diagram of the header, you'll see that, you'll
notice that the V6 header has less individual
feel than the V4 header.
So, what they kind of did was they tried to
clean house a little bit.
V4, there are a bunch of stuff that people don't
really use, and it's just there for either
historical purposes or, you know, they put in there
so someone can have a covert channel or whatever.
But in V6, they kind of look to see, okay, now that
we've been using the Internet for, like, 20-something
years, you know, we can see what fields people actually
use in the header.
So, for example, one of these things is the type of
service bits, and the type of service bit, it's supposed
to be for QoS.
And, but realistically, in the wild, no, not too many
routers pay attention to it.
So, it's kind of a useless field.
And, you know, it ends up being, like, other protocols kind
of hack it and use those fields because it knows no one
will kind of view it.
So, they'll use it for their own purposes and all this
stuff.
So, in V6, they kind of, you know, fixed that a little
bit.
And if, you know, so right now, actually, I'll go into the
package header format a little bit.
Okay.
Now, you have the version, which is, you know, in V4,
it's the version field.
And in IPv6, you have the same thing as IP version.
And then, you have the traffic class, which is 8-bits.
And that used to be the packet priority in V4.
So, that's pretty much the same.
Now, one of the new things is the QoS bits that you have, the
types of service that I mentioned.
They're now kind of called flow labels.
And it's 20-bits.
I'm sorry.
You broke up right there.
What was that again that you were talking about the
QoS, which is the quality of service?
Right.
So, in V4, you have the TOS bits, the types of service bits that
I was saying no one uses, right?
Ah, okay.
Now, in V6, you have a flow label, which is 20-bits.
Now, the flow label is designed to be heavily used.
So, you know, the applications and the network layer is going to
actively use the flow label to identify different types of flows.
Now, when I say flow, I mean a whole kind of session of traffic.
So, if you have, like, an AIM session going on, like, that would be a flow.
If you have an IRC session going on, that would be a flow.
Okay.
So, it can separate out each kind of, like, application for you.
Got you.
Right.
Now, the payload length is 16-bits.
Now, that is 64K in standard mode.
Or, if you have jumbo packets support, then it will be bigger than that.
Now, if you're using jumbo mode, then the payload length is going to have
something that basically refers you to the IP header options.
So, you can have, like, a bigger number in there.
And then you also have some of the same things, like the hop limit,
which is 8-bits, and it does the same thing as the TTL field, and that's in V4.
And you have the 128-bit source address and destination address.
Now, one of the things that are different in a bad way, in my opinion,
is that you have a next header kind of pointer.
So, now, in V4, you have the header, and, like, that's it.
And that's the structure.
And if you look at the network code, if that structure is in place, and it's, like,
you know, a C struct, and when you get a packet in, you just kind of cast that packet header
onto the struct, and everything is good.
But in V6, what you do is you have an 8-bit next header field, and that points
to the transport layer protocol.
And the whole thing, the whole header in V6 works like this.
You have a header, and at the end, you have the next header pointer,
which tells you where the next header is.
And if you do this in code, what ends up happening is your implementation is coming much slower
because you have to deal with pointers,
and you can't just, like, cast a struct onto the data that you get and start using it.
Wow.
That's, um, I'm not sure if that's translating over to radio very well,
but, uh, that's kind of deep.
Well, okay, so, I mean, basically, think of, think of the V6 header as now being a length list.
Before, it was an array of a specific length, right?
Mm-hmm.
But now, so, if you have an array of, like, a specific length, like N,
you know where everything's supposed to be, and if you say, want this field,
then you can just go to that offset and access it, right?
Easy.
Mm-hmm.
But now, the V6 packet header is a linked list.
So, if you want a specific field, you can't just go to some offset
because, basically, the header can be a variable length.
So, you have to traverse the header and follow the pointers
and then get to the correct section and then access the field.
Yeah, I'm sure our listeners that have some experience,
and OOP and object-oriented programming are probably familiar with linked lists
and some of these terms, but, um, I don't know.
But you're a fucking moron?
Huh?
But you're a fucking moron?
Yeah, I'm a fucking moron, of course, so, um, hmm.
Well, I don't know.
Maybe we should, um, kind of wind this down a little bit.
Um, that's, wow.
I mean, there's so much.
I, I, I, I can't believe, again, that, I mean, I almost feel like there's,
I, I, how much more, do you have much more you wanted to talk about?
I mean, I could see this going into two or three more episodes if we're not careful about it.
No, um, I actually only have, uh, five minutes of stuff.
Okay, well, let's, um.
Yeah, so I'll just wrap it up.
Yeah, let, let's keep going.
You've got, you, I think we've got about five or so minutes.
I think we're okay.
Okay.
Um, okay, so I just want to talk about address scope a little bit.
Uh, there's three Unicat scopes.
You have global, site local, and link local.
Now, the site local addresses is your, basically your non-link local addresses,
which are valid within your scope of a site, in quotes, and you can't export, you know, beyond your site.
So I guess that's like your private site, um, you know, not private, as in like, uh, you know,
one, one, nine, two, one, six, eight, but private, as in, it's supposed to be just your site.
Now, the link local addresses, logically, you know, therefore, uh, you know,
those things that are, you're connected to on the same hub or switch, right?
Like your local LAN.
So, like, things you can get from one hub.
And then, finally, your site local is basically your network.
So they split it up like that, and, you know, it's not too important, but that's just how they do it.
And, lastly, you have v6, right?
So the main thing to think about is how are you going to switch over.
Now, right now, right now at this moment, you can go and use IPv6 in your home network.
But what you're going to have to do is tunnel over v4.
So you have v6 traffic stuck in a v4 packet and sent over the internet to another site that has, that supports v6.
So the options very quickly are having a dual stack, which means you have one network stack that implements v6
and v4 that share a lot of the, you know, common parsing code, but just the different parts, you know,
that need to be different are.
And I don't actually have an example of this because I don't know, you know,
if people are implementing this because I think they just do two for, like, for simplicity.
Now, you can do tunneling, which is what I was mentioning, you know, which is the encapsulation,
and you have to, like, find a way to know where to send it.
So now there are these, like, broker services.
You can connect to them directly and you can pay them to send, you know, to send these things for you
to, like, know, they know where to, where the v6 addresses are on the other side.
So they'll do the encapsulation for you.
Now, there are other automatic routing, tunneling techniques you can use, like, like the six phone exists,
where, where it's, like, people themselves run a bunch of servers.
So you have these little islands of v6 and you kind of do the routing yourself
and you, like, pass routes around and stuff.
Right.
Well, when this goes wide scale, to kind of wrap this up,
basically what's going to happen is we're going to turn the interweb off for a day, right?
And then come up the next day on IPv6.
Is that how we're, isn't that what we're doing?
Yeah, yeah, pretty much.
No one views the internet on January 2nd, 2010.
Okay, okay, Mark your calendars.
That's the day that the switchover will happen.
Yeah, so I mean, like, Japan and China, like, and other people who kind of are sick of the U.S.
owning the internet, they're, they're, one of their motivations is, like, you know,
we want to control our own internet, so we're going to switch to v6 and screw you guys.
We're going home.
And we're going to have our own backbone.
Screw you guys.
So then we're really all over it.
All right, well, I think, um, I think unless there's anything else you've got to spit out quickly,
that's going to probably take us into the closing.
Actually, we've got maybe one or two minutes.
Can I ask a couple quick questions, or did you?
Yeah, no, go for it.
Like, well, one thing that immediately comes to mind to me that I can see being hella annoying
is that right now it's, it's easy to remember or memorize your IP addresses.
It's four numbers, and we know the ranges of the numbers up to 255, the highest number.
It makes it easy to memorize, jot them down, et cetera, et cetera.
Isn't it going to be a pain with IPv6 trying to memorize your IP address, which is like
EF8A-JJ7Q, I mean, not Q, but you know what I mean.
Isn't it going to be a little bit more of a hassle for that?
Yeah, so, I mean, let me, first of all, hopefully, if things are implemented in a way where you
don't have to remember IP addresses, because, I mean, most people nowadays that are not geeks
and not hackers, they don't know, like, the IP addresses and stuff.
They just use DNS.
And hopefully, you know, that trend will continue and grow as the addresses become more, you
know, unwieldy.
But having said that, though, you don't really need to remember the, like, the whole address.
It's broken up in such a way that you can remember, like, the address of a site, and then you can,
you know, remember the address of, like, a host.
So you can do it in a hierarchical way.
Right.
There is a method to it, and we'll have to put that up on the website or something, because
we're running low.
But there is a breakdown that says this first part of the address, well, I narrow it down
to a certain part, and then the second part of the address.
There is some method to that.
There is a naming convention for that, for lack of a reason.
Yeah, I mean, if you want to know more specifics, just freaking go read the Wikipedia article.
Well, they're at the stage now, hopefully, yeah, hopefully from listening to this episode,
everyone should be on the stage now, where if you do go read that, you might actually
understand a lot more of it than when, before the show started.
I know I will for sure.
So let's close out the show for this week.
I think we did cover just about everything.
It was still a lot of information to force into one episode, but I think we got through
everything pretty well this time, enough that, again, people can take it from here and go
do their own research.
If there are any questions, of course, they can email us, radio at binrev.com, any kind
of feedback on this or any of the episodes of the show.
So, site of the week this week is something actually I picked up in the Binrev IRC channel.
It's a program.
It's called, well, the site is feedjournal.com, F-E-E-D-J-O-U-R-N-A-L.com.
It's kind of a neat little thing.
I don't know why somebody hadn't thought of it before that will take RSS feeds from multiple
sources and generate a PDF file that is basically, looks like a newspaper that you can actually
print off and make a newspaper out of it, which is kind of funny because when I see people
reading the paper, my joke is always, hey, a newspaper, isn't that like printing the internet,
basically?
So, actually, I guess now you can print the internet and make it a newspaper, so it comes
full circle.
So, that's kind of a neat program.
Closing music this week is, actually, it's the current song fight as we're airing this episode.
It's, uh, the track is called You Get the Wiser.
It's, um, this particular version is from Mr. Man and Dr. Funk.
I don't know who wins or if they'll win, so it'll be interesting to see if the one that
I liked or picked ends up winning or not.
But it's a nice song to end with because, um, actually, we're not going to do any shouts
tonight because I kind of want to bypass this.
And I'm sorry, Verbal, if you had any shouts, we'll put them off.
But I'd rather skip it because I kind of have some sad news to close the show with this
week.
Um, I, I gotta pass on my condolences, um, to the family of, of Lilo or Lilo, however
you want to pronounce it.
I actually know his real name.
I've spoken to him on the phone before, but he's the, the guy who's running the Freenode
IRC servers.
Um, we've dealt with him in the past.
Binrev was actually on Freenode for a while until we had some people come in there, stir up
a little trouble and that's actually how I met and spoke to, uh, him before.
And he unfortunately passed away a couple of weeks ago as I found out and not in a, not,
in a very bad way, unfortunately, a hit and run, which is not cool at all.
So, um, instead of giving shouts out, I just want to pass my condolences on to him.
And, uh, anybody who's ever met him knows that he was really trying to free note, make
Freenode into something different than what traditionally IRC has been with all the chaos
and the problems and everything.
So, um, somebody who was really driven to make change and do something good.
So, uh, my condolences go out to him and sorry to end on such a sad note for this week,
but verbal, thank you for doing the show again this week.
I think we did cover a lot of good topics and, again, got people started on the subject.
So, I think that is going to do it for this week.
Welcome to the DDP, my friend.
And let's tell everybody that we will see them next week.
Same Hack time.
Same Hack channel.
When you're old
Feeling like you're dead
With wrinkles on your head
Don't think about me
When you're young
Full of your energy
And the languid sun
Has just begun
To give us all
And the sun has seen
Where everyone has been
And then they're gone
Moving everyone
Along
Acting like you just don't care
But the sun will follow everywhere
When the young get old
And the old pass on
There will always be
A shining sun
It happens to
Everyone we know