31 Aug
2020
31 Aug
'20
8:34 a.m.
On 2020-08-31 02:52:41 William Morder via trinity-users wrote:
On Monday 31 August 2020 00:33:33 Stefan Krusche
wrote:
I would think that 0.0.0.0 is not really an address at all, whereas 127.0.0.1
(x7F 00 00 01) is the loopback address that lets the computer talk to itself.
I suppose 0.0.0.0 is someone's lazy idea for not having to remember
loopback. :-)
Leslie
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/
Please remember not to top-post:
http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
Hi Bill,
Am Montag 31 August 2020 schrieb William Morder via trinity-users:
The first hosts files that I found online all put 127.0.0.1, which I
blindly accepted. It seemed to work okay, but then I heard about using
0.0.0.0. My instinct was that the second choice was better; because
127.0.0.1 is also the address I use for proxy configuration, so it goes
somewhere.
Better that I should send unwanted requests to nowhere, rather than any
somewhere. This is why I raised the question about security in my earlier
post. If proxy traffic is directed there, then there must be somewhere that
it can go; and if some bad actor knows this -- well, maybe it is a stretch,
but perhaps it could be used by a malicious intruder.
0.0.0.0 makes more sense.
I wonder if there are some situations in which 127.0.0.1 might be
preferable, or the two variants used in tandem -- for example, you
mentioned "if you have a web server"? Maybe, then, it would be useful to
create a home version and a web server version.
Anyway, I don't want to go through and change items line-by-line, and to
run find-and-replace will still leave me with a lot of duplicates, and the
list is already big enough to be unwieldy for kedit to handle. I believe
Michael mentioned some kind of script?
Bill I do know that I see a big difference between
using a customized
hosts file instead of (only) depending on ad-blockers. As soon as I
overwrite the hosts file with my list, I find that my system is more
stable. It's not only the ads that get blocked, it seems, but also
other unwanted connections.
Sure, that's what I want as well :-) I'm using a huge /etc/hosts as
well, but only with 0.0.0.0 so all requests from unwanted domains get
send to nowhere without my system (localhost) trying to serve them
before.
The purpose of using 127.0.0.1 in /etc/hosts, AIUI, is to make the web
server on localhost show some substitute page/image/whatever to
indicate something has been blocked. If you don't have a web server
running on localhost and configured to serve such requests it doesn't
make sense to put 127.0.0.1 in /etc/hosts to my understanding.
HTH
Kind regards,
Stefan