Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by extrapickles 3583 days ago
The only problem with that is all ISPs will have to configure their DNS systems to do so (not going to happen soon). The only reasonable fix would be applied at the browser level as they are updated reasonably often.

A better mitigation than that mentioned in the article is that browsers should ignore a DNS update if it goes from a public IP to a private IP range. DNS pinning as suggested would cause havoc with most wifi captive portals, especially for those not computer savvy or the badly configured/implemented captive portals.
2 comments
marcosdumay 3583 days ago
> DNS pinning as suggested would cause havoc with most wifi captive portals

It will require extra page reloads. Everybody is used to reload pages for any random reason by now (and you can reload by javascript too). I don't think it would cause much havoc.

link
tener 3583 days ago
I think you may be able to discover actual IP addresses with WebRTC. If the host is on IPv6 then it may well be a public adress. Hence it would be impossible to define "local" in this setup.
link
extrapickles 3583 days ago
As far as I'm aware[0] there are private IPv6 addresses that should be treated the same as 169.254 and 10/172/192 in IPv4. It shouldn't matter what IP the host has, just what IP the address of the site you are communicating with goes from the public range to private range.

[0]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4291#section-2.5.6

link