logoalt Hacker News

colmmacctoday at 9:54 AM4 repliesview on HN

If GitHub flipped a switch and enabled IPv6 it would instantly break many of their customers who have configured IP based access controls [1]. If the customer's network supports IPv6, the traffic would switch, and if they haven't added their IPv6 addresses to the policy ... boom everything breaks.

This is a tricky problem; providers don't have an easy way to correlate addresses or update policies pro-actively. And customers hate it when things suddenly break no matter how well you go about it.

[1] https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-cloud@latest/organizat...


Replies

alibarbertoday at 10:10 AM

Having been messing around personally with getting my own blocks of IP addresses and routing[1] - I've become terrified at the idea of implementing access control based on IP address.

Unless your own organisation in the RR has the IP addresses assigned to you as Provider Independent resources, there just seems to be so many places where 'your' IP address could, albeit most likely accidentally, become not yours any more. And even then, just like domain names, stop renewing the registration and someone else will get them - I was that someone else recently...

[1] AS202858

show 1 reply
progbitstoday at 10:16 AM

Anyone who relies on IP filtering for security deserves to have it broken. Change my mind.

show 3 replies
bluGilltoday at 11:25 AM

If you can't handle sites switching to ipv6 in 2015 (ten years ago) your security plan is garbage.

TabTwotoday at 11:30 AM

Thanks to the trend to SASE like Palo Alto GlobalProtect or ZScsler this practice is not a good idea anymore. Speaking of ZScaler, they are still IPv4 only, right?