Shoutout to Frictional Games (known for Penumbra, Amnesia, Soma) who publish many of their older (commercially successfully) games on their GitHub: https://github.com/FrictionalGames

There is this notion that IPv6 exposes any host directly to the internet, which is not correct. When the client IP is attacked “directly” the attacker still talks to the router responsible for your network first and foremost.

While a misconfiguration on the router is possible, the same is possible on IPv4. In fact, it’s even a “feature” in many consumer routers called “DMZ host”, which exposes all ports to a single host. Which is obviously a security nightmare in both IPv4 and IPv6.

Just as CGNAT is a thing on IPv4, you can have as many firewalls behind one another as you want. Just because the target IP always is the same does not mean it suddenly is less secure than if the IP gets “NATted” 4 times between routers. It actually makes errors more likely because diagnosing and configuring is much harder in that environment.

Unless you’re aggressively rotating through your v6 address space, you’ve now given advertisers and data brokers a pretty accurate unique identifier of you. A much more prevalent “attack” vector.

That is what the privacy extension was created for, with it enabled it rotates IP addresses pretty regularily, there are much better ways to keep track of users than their IP addresses. Many implementations of the privacy extension still have lots of issues with times that are too long or with it not even enabled by default.

Hopefully that will get better when IPv6 becomes the default after the heat death of the universe.

Will take a look at the talk once I get time, thanks. If you can find the original one you were talking about, please link.

For servers, there is some truth that the address space does not provide much benefit since the addressing of them is predictable most of the time.

However, it is a huge win in security for private internet. Thanks to the privacy extension, those IPs are not just generated completely random, they also rotate regularily.

It should not be the sole source of security but it definitely adds to it if done right.

With NAT on IPv4 I set up port forwarding at my router. Where would I set up the IPv6 equivalent?

The same thing, except for the router translating 123.123.123.123 to 192.168.0.250 it will directly route abcd:abcd::beef to abcd:abcd::beef.

Assuming you have multiple hosts in your IPv6 network you can simply add “port forwardings” for each of them. Which is another advantage for IPv6, you can port forward the same port multiple times for each of your hosts.

I guess assumptions I have at the moment are that my router is a designated appliance for networking concerns and doing all the config there makes sense, and secondly any client device to be possibly misconfigured. Or worse, it was properly configured by me but then the OS vendor pushed an update and now it’s misconfigured again.

That still holds true, the router/firewall has absolute control over what goes in and out of the network on which ports and for which hosts. I would never expose a client directly to the internet, doesn’t matter if IPv4 or IPv6. Even servers are not directly exposed, they still go through firewalls.

Anything connected to an untrusted network should have a firewall, doesn’t matter if it’s IPv4 or IPv6.

There’s functionally no difference between NAT on IPv4 or directly allowing ports on IPv6, they both are deny by default and require explicit forwarding. Subnetting is also still a thing on IPv6.

If anything, IPv6 is more secure because it’s impossible to do a full network scan. My ISP assigned 4,722,366,482,869,645,213,696 addresses just to me. Good luck finding the used ones.

With IPv4 if you spin up a new service on a common port it usually gets detected within 24h nowadays.

What for? It’s not like any more updates are planned.

Off the top of my head, why did you set the prefix to 0x1? I was under the impression that it only needs to be set if there are multiple vlans

I have multiple VLANs, 0x1 is my LAN and 0x10 is my DMZ for example. I then get IP addresses abcd:abcd:a01::abcd in my LAN and abcd:abcd:a10::bcdf in my DMZ.

However, I get a /56 from my ISP wich gets subnetted into /64. I heard it’s not ideal to subnet a /64 but you might want to double check what you really got.

what are your rules for the WAN side of the firewall?

Only IPv4 + IPv6 ICMP, the normal NAT rules for IPv4 and the same rules for IPv6 but as regular rule instead of NAT rule.

My LAN interface is only getting an LLA so maybe it’s being blocked from communicating with the ISP router.

If you enable DHCPv6 in your network your firewall should be the one to hand out IP addresses, your ISP assigns your OPNsense the prefix and your OPNsense then subnets them into smaller chunks for your internal networks.

It is possible to do it without DHCPv6 but I didn’t read into it yet since DHCPv6 does exactly what I want it to do.

I’m no expert on IPv6 but here’s how I did it on my OPNsense box:

• Activate IPv6 on your WAN interface (probably already done)
• Activate IPv6 on the LAN interface, use Track interface on IPv6, track the WAN interface and choose a prefix ID like 0x1
• Activate DHCPv6 under Services -> ISC DHCPv6 for your LAN interface (you can shorten the range like ::eeee to ::ffff, you don’t have to type the full IP)
• Activate Router advertisments under Services -> Router Advertisments for your LAN interface (set Advertisments to Managed and Priority to High

After that your DHCP server should serve public IPv6 addresses inside of your prefix and clients should be able to connect to the internet.

A few notes:

• Don’t forget to add an allow rule for IPv6 on your LAN as well if you only have one for IPv4
• Repeat the steps above for every VLAN you have, always use a different prefix ID
• You don’t have to use NAT rules with IPv6 anymore and can just directly add a regular firewall rule to WAN with the target IP and port and you are done
• Make sure you don’t have any of the various “Disable IPv6” toggles enabled, there’s a few in the firewall settings and general settings for example

Reddit once banned me for “vote brigading” a post on a subreddit that was linked in a different subreddit, a full year after I upvoted said post.

That was the day I stopped interacting on Reddit.

That is what I’m doing currently but now unbound doesn’t talk to the root servers anymore, it sends all queries to Quad9.

Both scenarios are not ideal because you always end up with one entity knowing all your queries.

Right you are, but don’t start telling everyone so I can’t silently download my lossless albums from Tidal, Deezer and Qobuz anymore.

Not illegal but it leaves all your DNS lookups in plain text with your ISP, which just doesn’t sit right with me.

Not that the ISP in my country would care.

Is it possible to get unbound to talk to the root servers via TLS/HTTPS by now?

I’m currently using Quad9 because they support DNS over TLS and DNS over HTTPS.

Pretty disappointed so far, almost none of the prompts I tried came out better in SD3. It also completely botches anything humanoid.

I used to have a second partition with Windows for such cases, but over time I just stopped bothering with those games.

Now I just refund if it doesn’t work and move on in my to-play list.

I still have a Windows VM for some applications and for doing firmware updates but I never bothered to set it up for playing games.

Eternal was a recipe for stress for me.

That’s the thing that made it great for me, but I liked both 2016 and Eternal for different reasons. Would be great if they can somehow satisfy both camps with the next entry.

Can confirm this works, removed my tablet screen with my 3D printer.

Definitely will wait for the full soundtrack to release before checking out the game. That trailer music sounded pretty weak.

I use ROCm for inference, both text generation via llama.cpp/LMStudio and image generation via ComfyUI.

Works pretty much perfectly on a 6900 XT. Very fast and easy to setup.

I had issues with some libraries only supporting CUDA when trying to train, but that was almost 6 months ago so things probably have improved in that area as well.

Is it safe to use JELLYFIN_SQLITE__disableSecondLevelCache all the time or should it only be used for testing?

I have had a lot of database lock issues since 10.9.