Why is this strange IP address in Network connections?

[anikin]

Wiggling. That's exactly how both of you handled Atle's questions today. What on earth pinging has to do with the issue? Do you understand the meaning of "context"? I had to go back through the posts to find this:

That's where your argument lost all credibility.

I don't understand why this comment is problematic. I understood Anikin to be suggesting that this was one way a user could determine their external IP. Is that not correct? It certainly works for me (or are you suggesting that the resultant info cannot be trusted?)

If anyone could be suspected of possible tracking/data-mining/anything to make a buck it would be the mighty Google.Trust Google at your own risk.

If I say "duplicity", will it help you better understand my post?
If anikin says "google", he loses credibility. If Micko pings, it, what happens to his credibility?

[mavrothal]

What on earth pinging has to do with the issue?

...
Looks like it is already queried, although for something else

Code: Select all

...
ping -4 -c 1 8.8.8.8 #64.233.169.103 #google 111110 address no longer responding. 
[ $? -ne 0 ] && exit 2 #ip address not accessable. 

ping -4 -c 1 www.google.com 
[ $? -ne 0 ] && exit 3 #domain name address not accessable. 
...

Who says Puppy isn't open to a broader partnership ... to the highest bidder, that is

Are you feeling OK?

(from wikipedia

Ping is a computer network administration utility used to test the reachability of a host .... Ping operates by sending Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMP) echo request packets to the target host and waiting for an ICMP response .... (ICMP) is assigned protocol number 1. ICMP differs from transport protocols such as TCP and UDP in that it is not typically used to exchange data between systems

)

[anikin]

Ping'ing (the most reliable uptime-wise) site to test if your connection works is presented as "connecting users to computers".

Look, I want you to stay on the same page.
"you have no moral right to connect users computers to ANY address without their consent and knowledge" was/is the issue, that you and Micko mishandled today answering Atle's questions. It has nothing to do with the script about pinging, that I posted long after your miserable failure, OK? Take pinging as a separate subject about duplicity and let's dispense it at that.

[mavrothal]

"you have no moral right to connect users computers to ANY address without their consent and knowledge" was/is the issue

The computer is not connected to any computer.
Is using the network services to provide specific features that can not be provided otherwise. If you do not like these features you can either inactivate them or use another OS that does not have them, let's say AlphaOS.

Regarding consent and knowledge, is open source, visible to (and changeable by) everyone and is not trying to hide anything. That is the beauty of the open source.

Regarding your bitterness, I'm afraid that I have no immediate solution. Maybe follow the advice you gave to someone sometime ago.

[01micko]

Looks like it is already queried, although for something else.
Who submitted the feature?
Oh my, it must be a typo in Barry's script. Micko will never do that. We know how he feels about Google.
/usr/sbin/delayedrun
line 38

Code: Select all

#111110 ping 64.233.169.103 address no longer responding. 01micko: use 8.8.8.8

Look at the date... 111110.... that was for getting flashplayer which was removed with the advent of getflash (shinobar) early in 2012. For the record, 64.233.169.103 is (was? maybe still is) google too. I simply supplied Barry with a working address rather than a broken one.

@mavrothal, I don't get the hysteria either.. FFS they use Google!

Speaking of.......
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... r-hacking/

Anyway, I do use google with a touch of contempt! I consider them linux "rapists" but sometimes it's handy for my own reasons. Self preservation is at the top of my list so I use sparingly.

/usr/sbin/check_internet

Code: Select all

#!/bin/sh
#(c) Copyright Barry Kauler 2012, license GPL3 (/usr/share/doc/legal)
#call from: /usr/sbin/delayedrun, quicksetup, ...
#120331 ping -4 for ipv4, refer: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=616090#616090

export LANG=C

IFCONFIG="`ifconfig | grep '^[pwe]' | grep -v 'wmaster'`"
[ ! "$IFCONFIG" ] && exit 1 #no network connection.

ping -4 -c 1 8.8.8.8 #64.233.169.103 #google 111110 address no longer responding.
[ $? -ne 0 ] && exit 2 #ip address not accessable.

ping -4 -c 1 www.google.com
[ $? -ne 0 ] && exit 3 #domain name address not accessable.

exit 0 #success
###END###

Who says Puppy isn't open to a broader partnership ... to the highest bidder, that is.

It's part of Barry's SNS, which up until November 11, 2013 I had no control over. That script is next on the chopping block. Rome wasn't built in a day and I will remind you that there has been NO official release from woof-CE as yet.

Code: Select all

ping -4 -c 1 www.icanhazip.com
[ $? -ne 0 ] && exit 3 #domain name address not accessable.

If anikin says "google", he loses credibility. If Micko pings, it, what happens to his credibility?

It gets destroyed. So I don't. Lets stick to current facts. If you want to dredge up the past be sure to get your research correct.

It's not icanhazip, it's not google - you have no moral right to connect users computers to ANY address without their consent and knowledge.

Yeah? So, how does trisquel do it? To test for an outside connection a program must make some sort of call to the outside. Sure, you can ping the name server but what if it's connection is down? Since you are here to enlighten us please show us how it's done. I don't think I have used any OS where there is not some uninitiated (by me) call to outside.
* Clarification. If using ppp to connect the name server is outside.How do we stop that?

The issue should have been closed by now.

It is. It's you who keep whining with unsubstantiated "evidence".

[gcmartin]

Thanks @Karl Godt

To enhance what you show, if you "tell" your router/modem to forward its syslog related data to your LAN's syslog server, you will see the external IP and changes that occur from the ISP to the router when you look at the syslog server entries. OR, if your router maintains a syslog, you can probably build a simple routine to get the external IP via a pull from the router.

These are very old (very old) techniques for tracking ISP behavior to see the frequency of changes an ISP may be doing with your router connected to the ISP's network. You will see the external IP assignments when they change.

Hope this helps anyone who want to monitor data collected by your router.

[01micko]

Thanks @Karl Godt

To enhance what you show, if you "tell" your router/modem to forward its syslog related data to your LAN's syslog server, you will see the external IP and changes that occur from the ISP to the router when you look at the syslog server entries. OR, if your router maintains a syslog, you can probably build a simple routine to get the external IP via a pull from the router.

The problem with that is that not everyone has permission to see router logs - with good reason.

What are the implications of sending a packet to a root hint server? @gcmartin, you should be able to answer this.

Example:

When connected:

Code: Select all

# traceroute -m 5 a.root-servers.net
traceroute to a.root-servers.net (198.41.0.4), 5 hops max, 46 byte packets
 1  home.gateway (192.168.1.254)  0.418 ms  0.393 ms  0.346 ms
 2  172.18.213.13 (172.18.213.13)  10.164 ms  11.021 ms  10.566 ms
 3  172.18.70.149 (172.18.70.149)  11.006 ms  11.062 ms  11.014 ms
 4  172.18.241.229 (172.18.241.229)  17.872 ms  18.239 ms  12.008 ms
 5  bundle-ether10.woo9.brisbane.telstra.net (203.45.53.229)  17.628 ms  11.565 ms  11.980 ms
# echo $?
0

EDIT: as MHHP points out below that this test is prone to failure. Maybe a simple ping of a.root-servers.net will do.

This sends a datagram to a.root-server.net, which is one of the 13 global servers of the internet.

The -m 5 tells traceroute to stop at 5 hops. Depending on the network topology 5 should be plenty. If connected the exit status is 0.

When disconnected:

Code: Select all

# traceroute -m 5 a.root-servers.net
traceroute: bad address 'a.root-servers.net'
# echo $?                           
1

jamesbond, mavrothal.. (+ others knowledgeable in networking). What are your thoughts on this from a technical and moral perspective (moral as in from the user and the host, [eg a.root-servers.net] perspective) for use as a basic connectivity check ??

[gcmartin]

The problem with that is that not everyone has permission to see router logs - with good reason. ...

Agreed for the casual LAN user. But, for the Puppy user with experience who administers his home LAN, he can access appropriate should they desire.

I think that as a general solution it may be much too complicated and might be cause for other concerns that members might not find comfort. But for some ...
___________________________________________________________________
On a different subject
Be aware that I am not poking fun and am not directing this at anyone, so please don't feel I talking about you, whoever. I offer this for perception.

This is along the lines of thought that is raised here where we perceive FUD.

Think about this: How much do you trust your ISP to be doing the "responsible" (however you want to consider it) thing with your router and your LAN with the ethernet/internet information it knows about? Ever wonder why they sometimes ask what router you are using on your support calls? Ever thought about how much information they know about you that you haven't ever considered?

How that for your paranoia, now! (Snowden alluded to this. BUT the press ONLY focused on the search giants of Microsoft, Yahoo, Apple, Google, etc.)

Cheers!

[Smithy]

Well we have no choice on that, you just have to trust the ISP to be decent and ethical, otherwise everyone will have to go the ominously titled darknet, ominously because it is not within control, control, control echo echo echo.

Which is like morse code between communities I think. Might catch on.

[MinHundHettePerro]

@01micko

I'm not a network expert, nor will I delve into the morality of your suggestion. That said, I'll oppose to the suggested am-I-alive-call from a more practical viewpoint; while still exiting with error-code 0, the time consumed in the execution of the command is extensive:

Code: Select all

# time traceroute -m 5 a.root-servers.net
traceroute to a.root-servers.net (198.41.0.4), 5 hops max, 38 byte packets
 1  pc2 (192.168.1.1)  6.866 ms  0.547 ms  0.524 ms
 2  *  *  *
 3  *  *  *
 4  *  *  *
 5  *  *  *

real	1m0.133s
user	0m0.003s
sys	0m0.013s
#

!
1 (one!) minute !

Whether my router or my ISP requires an ICMP ECHO-call instead of a UDP-call, I wouldn't dare to guess, but the consumed time for executing the command with the -I (capital i) switch is slightly less:

Code: Select all

# time traceroute -I -m 5 a.root-servers.net
traceroute to a.root-servers.net (198.41.0.4), 5 hops max, 38 byte packets
 1  pc2 (192.168.1.1)  0.581 ms  0.571 ms  0.507 ms
 2  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  9.024 ms  8.909 ms  7.777 ms
 3  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  17.962 ms  8.979 ms  12.353 ms
 4  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  11.616 ms  9.377 ms  19.595 ms
 5  xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  36.440 ms  38.249 ms  33.962 ms

real	0m0.428s
user	0m0.013s
sys	0m0.007s
#

. And, btw, why not just ping the bastards

Code: Select all

# time ping -c 1 a.root-servers.net
PING a.root-servers.net (198.41.0.4): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 198.41.0.4: seq=0 ttl=55 time=41.248 ms

--- a.root-servers.net ping statistics ---
1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 41.248/41.248/41.248 ms

real	0m0.151s
user	0m0.007s
sys	0m0.007s
# 

?
Hope this helps in some way ...
/MHHP

[01micko]

MHHP

Only don't want to use ping because some networks may block ICMP. (-I also)

Puppy has a very cut down selection of network tools

Looks like your network (ISP?) is blocking UDP

I suppose ping it is then.

[OscarTalks]

Firewallstate-2.5 showing nice green and red shield icons in Dpup Wheezy 3.5.2.11 (with a touch of remastering).

An interesting beast. Just trying to get my head around a couple of aspects of it including the autostart thingy creating and deleting .desktop files. Are there now 2 lots of sleep 5 in the script chain? Both needed?

[MinHundHettePerro]

Still haven't got any network- or moral expertise ...

Just playing around with my limited set-up.

Connected:

Code: Select all

# time for i in a b c d e f g h i j k l m;do traceroute -m 5 ${i}.root-servers.net|head -n 1|grep -o '([0-9]*.[0-9]*.[0-9]*.[0-9]*)';[ $? == "0" ] && echo "Have connection with DNS-server" && break ;done
(198.41.0.4)
Have connection with DNS-server

real	0m0.087s
user	0m0.017s
sys	0m0.017s

Unconnected:

Code: Select all

# time for i in a b c d e f g h i j k l m;do traceroute -m 5 ${i}.root-servers.net|head -n 1|grep -o '([0-9]*.[0-9]*.[0-9]*.[0-9]*)';[ $? == "0" ] && echo "Have connection with DNS-server" && break ;done
traceroute: bad address 'a.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'b.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'c.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'd.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'e.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'f.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'g.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'h.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'i.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'j.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'k.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'l.root-servers.net'
traceroute: bad address 'm.root-servers.net'

real	0m0.717s
user	0m0.213s
sys	0m0.250s

Unless you are in a building where getting a URL translated to an ip(v4, yeah, I know, ipv4 as far as the above grepping goes)-address still doesn't mean you're on the outside (i.e. in-house DNS-server) wouldn't something like the above ascertain contact with a live (outside?) DNS-server, i.e. a live network connection (without pinging and forcing ICMP on traceroute, while still being prepared to contact all 13 of them)?

Or not,
anyway, I'll now retreat from this layman's-speculating on networks ... it's very late ...
Cheers & Fwiw /
MHHP

[mavrothal]

Only don't want to use ping because some networks may block ICMP. (-I also)

Networks do no block ping. Specific site may.
Whoever blocks ping certainly blocks trace (they both use ICMP too).
A 5 hop tracerout may or may not get you out of ISP network, depending on the topology and takes longer than ping in any case.

Short answer, ping is the way to go. Is less intrusive/revealing than anything else and is faster (for single ping) than anything else.
Major sites always allow ping (is in RFC regulations).

If you wary that one maybe down at some point add a backup site in case the first fails.
If you do not like google add yahoo, att, icanhazip, or pool.ntp.org, www.fsf.org etc.
The problem is when you want to ping specific IPs and not domains, where you do not know which one will work.
The current setting works fine to detect active connections all the way to the web (not to your ISB or your router), which is actually what is set out to do

[01micko]

Barry's test firsts detects for connectivity (IP) then DNS resolution. So a reliable 100% source is needed in that case. I once tried fsf, no go, was down one day.

This is what I have in my latest build:

Code: Select all

#!/bin/sh
#(c) Copyright Barry Kauler 2012, license GPL3 (/usr/share/doc/legal)
#call from: /usr/sbin/delayedrun, quicksetup, ...
#120331 ping -4 for ipv4, refer: http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=616090#616090
#140115 remove google

export LANG=C

IFCONFIG="`ifconfig | grep '^[pwe]' | grep -v 'wmaster'`"
[ ! "$IFCONFIG" ] && exit 1 #no network connection.

ping -4 -c 1 198.41.0.4 # using root hint servers 140115
[ $? -ne 0 ] && exit 2 #ip address not accessable.

ping -4 -c 1 a.root-servers.net # using root hint servers 140115
[ $? -ne 0 ] && exit 3 #domain name address not accessable.

exit 0 #success
###END###

[mavrothal]

This is what I have in my latest build:

I do not know the uptime stats on the specific sites but looks OK.
If anything add a backup site ie

Code: Select all

ping -4 -c 1 a.root-servers.net
if  [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
 ping -4 -c 1 site.alt
 [ $? -ne 0 ] && exit 3
fi 

If you come across any data showing that reliability of a.root-servers.net is as good as other major sites (a fast search did not yield anything) leave it as is.

About this "latest build" though....

[gcmartin]

Over the years I have setup many corporate nets where requested to limit pings is honored. Lately, in doing demo's and presentations, I have found that many educational-corporate sites do NOT allow pings to flow.

On the other hand, I have not seen a home network where pings were restricted.

Hope this helps

[anikin]

http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/so ... .5.tar.bz2

Latest sources for firewallstate, complete with legal bits.

Here's firewallstate compiled from the above source, modded by Micko.
It compiles OK, but this is the first pet, I've ever made out of my compilation. It may fail to install on your system, in which case, you will have to compile it yourself.

[mavrothal]

Here's the modded firewallstate compiled from the above source, provided by Micko.

If the source is modified, please provide also the source.
Thanks

[anikin]

Here's the modded firewallstate compiled from the above source, provided by Micko.

If the source is modified, please provide also the source.
Thanks

Modded by Micko - post corrected.