top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 176 points 5 months ago (13 children)

Oh yeah, that’s the new hexadecimal IPV8

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    Hello, I am apparently an idiot. What is wrong with that IP address that people can tell it's an immediate phishing scam?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    wait what? I feel like I am left behind in the tech. I only know about ipv4 and ipv6 😭😭😭

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 51 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    They’re making a joke. The numbers in the IP are way too high for v4, but the format isn’t v6, so it’s a “new range” of v8.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 160 points 5 months ago (17 children)

    I often assume this kind of thing is part of an effort to filter for idiots

    If you know that's an invalid IP address, you're probably less likely to fall for the scam after the scammer has put the setup work in. So if they filter you out before a scammer has to spend any actual effort on you, that means more time they can spend scamming people who might be more likely to fall for it

    That's why these things often have egregious spelling errors and other seemingly obvious red flags

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 78 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    Just because I know what a valid IP is doesn't mean I'm not an idiot 😎

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 19 points 5 months ago (5 children)

    It's possible in general, but I don't think that's what's going on specifically here; not many people read IP addresses in such detail to notice such things at first glance.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    It’s exactly what is happening, they’re filtering out people who know what an IP address is and can contain so that they get fewer time wasters.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago (3 children)

    The point schnurrito was making is that even if you know what an IP address is and what are valid or invalid IP addresses, a lot of people won't read the IP address. They'll just see numbers and skim over them. Even if you're keeping eyes peeled for scams, most people don't have their IP address memorised off the top of their heads so they wouldn't be looking to check if the IP address looks right or not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 104 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    It's not often you see IPv5

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 37 points 5 months ago

    It's good to see someone in this thread who knows what an IPv5 address looks like:

    IPv5 addresses consist of four hextets a 16bit each.  For the visual
    representation, those grouping are used.  The hextets might be
    written in decimal, separated by dot '.' characters, or as
    hexadecimal numbers, separated by colon ':'.
    

    It's long past time to start replacing our IPv4.1 deployments!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 54 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    In addition to what others have already posted, I suspect that this might be an attempt to evade spam/phishing filters that are looking for an IP address with a specific regular expression. Having a fake IP address that doesn’t match the traditional ^((25\[0-5]|(2\[0-4]|1\d|\[1-9]|)\d)\\.?\b){4}$ format might let this message slip through.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 50 points 5 months ago

    This is just an IPv5, they're quite rare in the wild

  • source
  • [–] 43 points 5 months ago (4 children)

    Took me a second to figure out what was wrong with the email... I choked on a laugh when I saw the IP

    What a bizarre, narrow window of knowledge that person must have

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 5 months ago

    New address space unlocked

  • source
  • [–] 34 points 5 months ago (12 children)

    For the uninitiated, the joke is:

    spoilerEach number should has a maximum value of 255.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 25 points 5 months ago

    Jesus Christ, that’s Jason Bourne’s IP address!

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 5 months ago (1 child)
    load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 19 points 5 months ago (1 child)

    Sorry, that's my IP. I was trying something

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 5 months ago

    Please, do not share the button. It's gross.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 5 months ago

    no shit they don't recognize that IP :-D but hey, they also single handedly solved the IP4 address space crisis!

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 5 months ago (2 children)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 11 points 5 months ago

    Ok I admit I didn't get it at first because I expected the joke to be that the IP is 127.0.0.1 and didn't look closer at the digits

  • source
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    I think I see why the login attempt was unsuccessful!

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    Spain has better food, better beaches, hotter women, better fiesta, better weather, better lifestyle, better IP's.

    Deal with it.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 5 months ago

    They just wanted to make doubly sure that whoever they are phishing is an idiot before they proceed further.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    I was surprised to find that this doesn’t work at all.

    For instance, 300 is considered a valid IP by e.g. Firefox, typing 300/ into Firefox will navigate to http://0.0.1.44/. I was expecting this to be interpreted as just Σ 256ⁿ × dₙ mod 256⁴. But it isn’t, Firefox won’t accept this (it performs a web search instead). Neither will curl (which tries to look up a domain by this name).

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago

    Probably outer space

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›