local area network – Zyxel ATP800: static IP addresses can not access internet

I install a WiFi device in a company using a Zyxel ATP800 as default (and only) router.

LAN = 192.168.0.0/24
Zyxel = 192.168.0.254
DHCP range = .100 to .199
Free IPs = .50 to .99

If the WiFi device use DHCP, everything is fine.
If the WiFi device has a static IP address, say 192.168.0.50, it can access the internal network, but not internet. It can not even ping the Zyxel.

I tested with my Windows laptop on WiFi and wired Ethernet: same problem.
I tested with a Debian Raspberry Pi on wired Ethernet: same problem.
I tested with a free IP address from the DHCP range: same problem.

I have the admin password of the Zyxel, but I see nothing blatant among the ton of parameters.

Anyone has an idea about the source of this behaviour?

segregated witness – Why are P2WSH addresses larger than P2SH addresses?

Because P2SH addresses are too short to provide typically desirable levels of security security level we expect from Bitcoin, against certain attacks. On top of that, they use bech32 encoding rather than base58, which means they’re slightly longer for the same amount of data, but are case insensitive instead.

For any kind of “multi party” address (that is, an address constructed by multiple distinct and distrusting participants that each have their own key, such as multisig), a particular collision attack exists that has runtime O(2bits/2), where bits is the number of bits of entropy in the address.

P2PKH, P2WPKH, and P2SH addresses have 160-bit hashes in their addresses. For P2PKH and P2WPKH this is fine, as it only supports single-party construction. However, as P2SH supports multisig and other multi-party constructions, it means an ~280 attack is possible(*). Bitcoin typically has a 2128 security target for attacks, so this is insufficient. That doesn’t mean such a collision attack is practical – it’s just far weaker than what the rest of the system provides, and as computing performance increases it may become feasible for well-funded parties.

To address this, P2WSH introduced a multi-party-capable address that contains a 256-bit hash, so it has ~2128 collision security.

In the upcoming Taproot upgrade, a new P2TR address type is introduced. It has the same length as P2WSH addresses, and also contains ~256 bits of entropy. Due to the nature of Taproot, which merges P2PKH and P2SH style spending into one, this means even single-party addresses are 256 bits in it.

For details of the attack, see https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/54847/208.

(*) There are ways to avoid the collision attack problem, even with short hashes. They significantly complicate address construction and spending however. So the choice to provide a 256-bit script hash mechanism is really just to make sure multi-party address construction isn’t needlessly complicated.

allocation – How do custom allocators know which addresses of memory they can allocate?

I was looking at Rust’s Allocator trait. From my understanding, you give an allocator a length of memory and a word size to align to, and the allocator either gives you a pointer to the memory or an error. So clearly the custom Allocator is finding valid addresses in the memory somehow. How does the allocator know where in the heap it can allocate? Is there some “genesis” allocator that tells the custom Allocator which addresses it can take?

networking – trying to setup ip addresses on my network

enter image description here
here’s my schema , i’m trying to set up ip addresses to be able to ping from the first floor ( etage 1 ) to the second ( etage 2) , i tried setting up an ip address 192.168.233.2/24 with the gateway 192.168.233.1 to pcD , and 192.168.233.3/24 with the gateway 192.168.233.1 but im not able to ping please help

i’m trying to set ip addresses to my network , please help

enter image description here

here’s my schema , i’m trying to set up ip addresses to be able to ping from the first floor ( etage 1 ) to the second ( etage 2) , i tried setting up an ip address 192.168.233.2/24 with the gateway 192.168.233.1 to pcD , and 192.168.233.3/24 with the gateway 192.168.233.1 but im not able to ping
please help

malware – Sending meaningless Addresses requests to a series of malicious IPs

i was testing somethings on browsers and i faced a case that when i browse meaningless addresses like abc/ signortest/ word/
the request sent to ip addresses hosted on linode! that some of them was reported malicious.
and i receive two different answers.(pictures attached)

  1. 4001
  2. 503 Service Unavailable

how i can understand what’s going on?

enter image description here
enter image description here
enter image description here

active directory – Reserve Email Addresses for old users within Exchange organization

Due to a software dependency, I have an odd requirement in my environment, while trying to clean up stale accounts. I want to remove all the stale AD Users and Exchange mailboxes from the environment, however, I need to somehow reserve the SMTP Address for the stale account, so that the address cannot be assigned to another mailbox later (maybe a new user with the same name). I’m looking for the best strategy. technical details are not my concern.

I’ve ended up with the below two strategies (I think still there must be a better way, please advise):

  1. convert each mailbox to a contact. Steps:

    • remove mailbox (this will also delete the AD user)
    • create a contact with the email address of the deleted mailbox
      Cons: not much cleanup! because each object is actually replaced by another object.
  2. preserve all email addresses by adding each as a proxy address for a dummy user. Steps:

    • remove mailbox (this will also delete the AD user)
    • add the email address of the deleted mailbox as a proxy (additional) address into a dummy mailbox
      Cons: I have more than 6000 stale mailboxes. in exchange 2019 you can have ~1000 addresses per object.

another approach might be a “Disable-and-then-Enable-mailbox” strategy, which will remove all the old mailbox contents, preserves the address, and also preserve the user account. like the <1> method mentioned earlier, it actually does not clean up much.

What do you think is the best way to preserve a lot of email addresses in the Exchange Server (or Active Directory), and avoid those addresses from being assigned to new users after the original mailbox is deleted?

api design – What’s the best way to collect custom data (email addresses) in Prosody?

I’m using Prosody as the engine for an XMPP-based game service and app I’m developing, and need a way for users to sign up for the service. While signing up, it would be nice to have a CAPTCHA or other spam-blocker and some way to collect valid email addresses.

I’m aware of mod_register_ibr (which implements the registration part of XEP-0077, but that only saves a username and password without allowing for custom properties. The way I see it, I have three options:

  1. Have a two-step registration process, where one first registers on Prosody using mod_register_ibr and then enters additional info through another XEP-0077 endpoint exposed by my gaming service. (This can be combined into one step on the frontend/client so it doesn’t seem cumbersome to the user).
  2. Have a non-XMPP way for people to register: for example through a webpage or REST API. This could run the appropriate prosodyctl commands on the server to register the user in Prosody, or manipulate the database directly if it’s possible and I figure out how.
  3. Write a custom Lua module which reimplements XEP-0077 but asking for additional info as well this time. (Caveat: I’d have to figure out how to incorporate this info in Prosody’s database or set up a custom database or table for that).

Which of these would you recommend, in terms of how neat/non-complex it is as well as how long it would take to implement? Or does anyone have any better suggestions?

PS: I think this is a more appropriate place to post this question than StackOverflow, but correct me if I’m wrong!

Monarch wallet won’t release Bitcoin to Coinbase. No longer supports Bip84 addresses

Monarch wallet won’t release Bitcoin to Coinbase. It says that Monarch no longer supports Bip84 addresses. Please use a legacy or segwit address to continue.

How can I move BTC out of this wallet?

I started a Trust wallet and can’t send BTC to that one either.

I left coins in the Monarch wallet in 2018. At that time, I could move coins in and out if the wallet.

Do I need to buy monarch coins, or something like that? Or some other form of gas?

Please help.

user agent – Requests from a specific older version of Firefox distributed across many Google and Cloudflare IP addresses

I’ve been getting thousands of requests each day from a specific user agent, Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/38.0. They’re all from different IP addresses (the ones I’ve looked up have been Google LLC and Cloudflare), and they all use that exact same user agent.
nginx logs
So far I’ve seen 90 unique IP addresses

ip count

I’ve started giving 403 statuses back to them, since it seems like something is wrong here, but I can’t trace them back to any one specific point. They all seem to be legitimate requests, but they’re just so suspicious with the amount of servers they’re coming from. Am I missing something here?