They just wanted to make doubly sure that whoever they are phishing is an idiot before they proceed further.
I think I see why the login attempt was unsuccessful!
Spain has better food, better beaches, hotter women, better fiesta, better weather, better lifestyle, better IP's.
Deal with it.
This is just an IPv5, they're quite rare in the wild
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).
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
That's exactly the reaction they want. That aspect of the scam helps filter out people who might be smart enough to properly retaliate if they were to get scammed out of 20k or whatever.
Alternatively, the scammer is saving themselves some time; more educated, well-versed people will see the ip and not bother calling in. Less savvy people who don't know the IP address is bogus are likely easier to scam if they call the phone number or reply to the mail.
This is exactly right, I'm pretty sure. Scam emails are poorly written and have tells for anyone paying attention on purpose. It's a feature, not an error.
Scammers don't want to waste time on someone who will never believe that the government takes Walmart gift cards.
Dark patterns, aka reverse psychology, are rather fucked up by their very nature...
That's called Web 3.0
homey is being phished from internet 7.
It's not often you see IPv5
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!
Oh yeah, that’s the new hexadecimal IPV8
IPv5.
Hello, I am apparently an idiot. What is wrong with that IP address that people can tell it's an immediate phishing scam?
IP addresses can't have segment numbers going over 255.
Ahhhh. Thank you. Now the Ipv over 4 jokes make sense.
Yeah, IPv4 addresses use four bytes. Those four bytes are represented as four decimal numbers, separated by dots. And a byte can only represent the decimal values 0–255.
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
Just because I know what a valid IP is doesn't mean I'm not an idiot 😎
Let's see you write a regex for one, then we'll decide.
Why would anyone want to do that when there are dozens on stackoverflow?
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.
Movies and TV shows actually do it this way to prevent actual machines getting group hugged.
Like in that one X-Files episode, where the Lone Gunmen hack into an invalid IP.
You guys still getting the “claim your blockfi settlement payout” emails?
New address space unlocked
no shit they don't recognize that IP :-D but hey, they also single handedly solved the IP4 address space crisis!
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.
And it hooks tech illiterate people, avoiding people who know something's wrong. The perfect target.
For the uninitiated, the joke is:
spoiler
Each number should has a maximum value of 255.
*octet
The fact that I have a test in school today, and this is probable questiom in it, and this post reminded me of it, thanks I guess?
EDIT: wait, so each number should be maximum of 255? Why did I think it was just the last numbe :|
anyway thanks again for the unsolicited coincidental heads up
Yes, each number can land somewhere between 0-255, but there are some default reservations on specific IP ranges.
For instance, 0 is typically used as an identifier for the subnet, not as an actual device IP. For instance, a DHCP server may tell a device “your IP address is 192.168.1.168. The subnet range is 192.168.1.0/24 (meaning the mask is 255.255.255.0). But the 0 won’t (or shouldn’t) get assigned to a specific device.
255 is another special address, as it is used for broadcast messages. A packet sent to 255 gets sent to everything in that subnet. So for instance, if I wanted to broadcast a message to everything on the 192.168.1.0/24 range, I would send it to 192.168.1.255.
In regards to reserved IP ranges, there are a few standard private IP ranges:
192.168.0.0/16 one of the more common. (Subnet mask of 255.255.0.0). This basically means that (if everything is configured properly) your WAN IP won’t ever be something inside of that same range, as the router would very quickly throw up its hands in defeat. Like if your WAN IP from your ISP was 192.168.1.50, and you also had a device on your network with that same IP address, the router wouldn’t know which one (WAN IP or LAN device) to send traffic to.
The second private IP range is 172.16.0.0/20 (subnet mask of 255.240.0.0) meaning the second number can range from 0-31, and the last two octets can range from 0-255.
The last common private IP range is 10.0.0.0/8, (subnet mask of 255.0.0.0) so the last three octets can range from 0-255. You tend to see these more in corporate settings, as it allows for a truly astronomical number of devices to be connected.
Basically, all of this means that if you see an address in the 192.168.x.x, 172.0-32.x.x, or 10.x.x.x range, you know it’s a private IP address, not a WAN IP.
The last time I was this confused reading something was when I was trying to under organic chemistry.
Long story short? The subnet mask determines which numbers can change. A mask of 255 means there is no change. A mask of 0 means any number can change. So for instance, a range of 192.168.1.0 with a mask of 255.255.255.0 will only find other devices in the 192.168.1.x range. Because the last octet is the only one that isn’t 255.
And writing the range as 192.168.1.0/24 is simply a shorter way to accomplish the same thing. Each group of numbers is an octet made of 8 bits. So masking the first 8 bits (255.0.0.0) is /8. Masking the first 16 bits (255.255.0.0) is /16, and masking the first 24 bits (255.255.255.0) is /24. So 192.168.1.0/16 would be able to find anything in the 192.168.x.x range.
If you want to get really deep in it, you can manually calculate subnet masks. Remember that computers work in binary, and the octets are each a group of 8 bits. For example, the IP address 192.168.42.67 could also be written as 00000011.00010101.01010100.11000010 but that’s a nightmare for humans to remember so we use base 10 by default.
The subnet mask tells the computer which bits may be different. So a subnet mask of 255.255.255.0 looks like this: 11111111.11111111.11111111.00000000. So the computer will only scan for neighbors on any bits that are 0’s (unmasked). So in this case, if the range is 192.168.42.0/24, it will assume that the first three octets (192, 168, and 42, respectively) are going to match. So it will only scan for differences in the last octet.
Wait, that actually made sense? I kinda knew some of this but now it all commceted makes sense. thanks lol
I'm still angry even 15 years later after a teacher lowered my grade just because I checked "USB" as capable technologies for video transmission. There are literally USB monitors.
Granted, back then it really wasn't popular and bandwidth was shit, but it was capable of it.
USB to VGA dongles were definitely a thing over 15 years ago. USB 2.0 could manage it fineish. Maybe not at high resolutions and refresh rates, but it could handle a monitor just fine.
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
Jesus Christ, that’s Jason Bourne’s IP address!
Please, do not share the button. It's gross.
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.