• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

IP v6 illegal ?

Adam Howard

Well-known member
#1
As many of you should know, IP v4 has basically run out (out of IP's in v4 format). Which brings IP v6 into action. Without v6 or some kind of alternative, the internet will basically hit wall in terms of growth.

So I found it interesting to learn that The FBI wants to make IP v6 illegal or have the non-restrictive right to monitor every IP v6 IP address, world-wide (in every country).

Link to story http://rt.com/usa/news/fbi-internet-protocol-ipv6-212/
 

Anthony Parsons

Well-known member
#4
Tell them they're dreaming! The US are losing all credibility when it comes to trying to access other countries by force, and have zero chance of taking on the rest of the world with such nonsense. The FBI are US internal Federal police... why are they trying to claim access to the rest of the world? That is what agencies such as CIA, Mossad, ASIO, MI6, etc etc, are for. They deal with the International aspects abroad, not Federal authorities.

That is like giving the Australian Federal police access to all of the US citizens Internet activity. They have no jurisdiction outside of Australia, though ASIO are the abroad agency which would require such access... no doubt they do anyway, just like all other International agencies that operate abroad their country.
 

Adam Howard

Well-known member
#6
Would someone explain why this is only on Russia Today and Cnet?
Same reason why you'll not find anything bad about Russia on RT. If you want a better chance of learning about X country, you're better off getting that either

A) On the internet
B) From another country's news source

The days of creditable news from within are long over. Rather we have things such as FOX News in their place.
 

steven s

Well-known member
#7
Same reason why you'll not find anything bad about Russia on RT. If you want a better chance of learning about X country, you're better off getting that either

A) On the internet
B) From another country's news source

The days of creditable news from within are long over. Rather we have things such as FOX News in their place.
So you are saying you need to read a Russian website to find news about the US?
Or is a Russian website the only one that would pickup a story from Cnet.

This is not the first Cnet story that has been posted here that no one picks up.
A conspiracy or a hidden agenda?
 

Adam Howard

Well-known member
#8
So you are saying you need to read a Russian website to find news about the US?
Or is a Russian website the only one that would pickup a story from Cnet.

This is not the first Cnet story that has been posted here that no one picks up.
A conspiracy or a hidden agenda?
To learn about The US? It doesn't have to be a Russian website, most any outside news source will do.

And if you want to learn about Russia, find an outside news source for them... American, Canadian, British, France, ect.... ect...

You're not going to learn much of anything from any internal news source.
 

steven s

Well-known member
#9
To learn about The US? It doesn't have to be a Russian website, most any outside news source will do.

And if you want to learn about Russia, find an outside news source for them... American, Canadian, British, France, ect.... ect...

You're not going to learn much of anything from any internal news source.
My point is I haven't seen the story carried anywhere other than Cnet or RT.
Maybe I didn't google enough?
Cnet posts a story and it's credible. I'm not saying it is or it's not. Cnet to me is about as credible as FoxNews.
Seems people latch onto a story because that is what they want to believe.
 

Adam Howard

Well-known member
#10
My point is I haven't seen the story carried anywhere other than Cnet or RT.
Maybe I didn't google enough?
Cnet posts a story and it's credible. I'm not saying it is or it's not. Cnet to me is about as credible as FoxNews.
Seems people latch onto a story because that is what they want to believe.
I find the opposite to also be true.... People ignore a story, because it is what they do not want to believe.
 

steven s

Well-known member
#11
I find the opposite to also be true.... People ignore a story, because it is what they do not want to believe.
I do agree.
But who can you believe?
You (parenthetically) believe who you want to believe, or not.
I generally believe something when there are multiple sources.
But in today's day and age news is just copy and paste from one source.
Makes it difficult to be objective or who to trust.
 

Adam Howard

Well-known member
#12
I do agree.
But who can you believe?
You (parenthetically) believe who you want to believe, or not.
I generally believe something when there are multiple sources.
But in today's day and age news is just copy and paste from one source.
Makes it difficult to be objective or who to trust.
I find most of the time outside sources are better at "airing out" the truth, than an "internal source".

As I said before, the days of creditable news from within are long over. It is just a sad truth about our current world.

But it is a lot easier and perhaps more comforting to think none of it true.
 

Nasr

Well-known member
#13
I've read about this from another source. However, there is nothing about making it illegal, rather, the FBI wants to have control about how IP V6 is used to make tracing criminals online much easier.
 

Adam Howard

Well-known member
#15
You seem not to notice that "outside" "news" organizations might have their own motivations for printing false or misleading stories.
Granted, that is true, but the easier way to overcome that is find different outside sources and settle in between. And more than often, the collective of outside sources like to report on things that inside sources would never cover.

So overall, you have a better chance of getting more accurate news.
 

Lucas

Well-known member
#16
I've read about this from another source. However, there is nothing about making it illegal, rather, the FBI wants to have control about how IP V6 is used to make tracing criminals online much easier.
Which in return could become the moneymaker or spy of anything and everything. This is something human beings are going to have to learn to live with, you either track everyone, or you track no one. I'd rather them track no one, plus I guess if someone could really control everything that would mean serious job cuts?

Everything works in circles, absolutely everything, everything you do has a reaction, I think here what we need is the best possible way to do things without affecting everyone as best as possible, but governments and companies don't want that.

Can you imagine how much money the FBI could make by doing weird deals with RIAA or any of those greedy corporations asking the FBI for things to find users that download a few songs or crap like that? God it would be catastrophic, and if we keep opening our butt to everything the government wants to do, there will be no government anymore but powerful people that control everyone, which is slowly the way it is becoming. The best way to start moving away from this is actually teaching kids about it, so hopefully the next generation freaking cleans all this dumb mess, cause it's taking us nowhere.

Basically all governments are doing now seems like repressing people just like the old days, if governments really can't work and the same old things are going to keep happening, we might need a serious change in the way we think IMO.

Sorry for making this long and hopefully it all makes sense, not good at throwing all my social thoughts out there just like that. :p
 

shawn

Well-known member
#17
Okay... so I went and RTFA, and it doesn't say what you think it says.

An issue may also arise around the amount of registration information that is maintained by providers and the amount of historical logging that exists. Today there are complete registries of what IPv4 addresses are ‘owned’ by an operator. Depending on how the IPv6 system is rolled out, that registry may or may not be sufficient for law enforcement to identify what device is accessing the Internet.


All they're asking for is to have the same sort of centralized registry system that already exists with IPv4. That's hardly the same thing as routing the world's v6 traffic through FBI servers, which is what your summary suggests.
 

Sador

Well-known member
#18
Okay... so I went and RTFA, and it doesn't say what you think it says.

All they're asking for is to have the same sort of centralized registry system that already exists with IPv4. That's hardly the same thing as routing the world's v6 traffic through FBI servers, which is what your summary suggests.
Quote from the article:

According to report filed this week by Cnet’s Declan McCullagh, the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration and Royal Canadian Mounted Police officials have jointly asked Internet representatives that traceability features be enabled with IPv6 that will allow federal agents to identify suspected cybercriminals with the same kind of ease evident with IPv4.
It's not all they're asking for, according to this article. A database with what IP adress belongs to what ISP, is something entirely different than the vague claim they're trying to make with those traceability features.
 

shawn

Well-known member
#19
It's not all they're asking for, according to this article. A database with what IP adress belongs to what ISP, is something entirely different than the vague claim they're trying to make with those traceability features.
What "vague claims"? It's right there in your quote.... they want the same sort of traceability features that are already in IPv4.