3 ms·

With my ISP, I see CGNAT as a feature as it obfuscates my IPv4 address. Then I also get millions of IPv6 addresses that are not CGNAT, so it is a real win as f

• GoblinSlayer 2y ago
  For this you can just have a socks proxy instead of NAT. Works with ip6 too.
• nickburns 2y ago
  ISP still has CGNAT logs and can presumably still be lawfully subpoenaed. it's a false cloak. and in terms of identity tracking—all teh marketeers (who sleep with the CGNAT ISPs mind you) can still exceedingly accurately profile you and keep tabs on what you're up to whether behind your CGNAT ISP or CGNAT telecom alike. it's a false sense of privacy.
  • sp332 2y ago
    Making attackers get a subpoena is actually a huge barrier. Especially compared to just handing it out to every server you make a request to.
    • nickburns 2y ago
      that level of sophisticated target likely doesn't rely upon nor hang its hat on lawful controls, either.
• WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
  > With my ISP, I see CGNAT as a feature as it obfuscates my IPv4 address. It can become an issue when sites like The Economist don't vet their blocklists - and then someone behind the NAT does something that makes the list-author grumpy.
• WarOnPrivacy 2y ago
  > see CGNAT as a feature as it obfuscates my IPv4 address - then get millions of IPv6 addresses that are not CGNAT It's tough trying to connect to home IPv6 services - when all the locations you visit are served by an ISP that doesn't support IPv6. That's the scenario here.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]