[HN Gopher] Sixth grader expelled after Zoom provided possibly i...
___________________________________________________________________
 
Sixth grader expelled after Zoom provided possibly inaccurate IP
address
 
Author : WarOnPrivacy
Score  : 73 points
Date   : 2021-05-22 20:40 UTC (2 hours ago)
 
web link (www.ajc.com)
w3m dump (www.ajc.com)
 
| content_sesh wrote:
| > The Zoom bombers' public IP addresses matched Malachi's -- but
| four other students who did not appear to be Zoom bombers were
| also listed as having Malachi's public IP address, an
| impossibility since they were not in the same house, said Scott
| Moulton, a Woodstock-based forensics expert hired by the attorney
| working on Malachi's case.
| 
| So in other words, 5 students plus the zoom bomber had the same
| "public IP address" (probably due to NATing) in this list, and
| they picked him as the culprit. What did they do, roll a dice?
 
| liveoneggs wrote:
| the article keeps saying "LOCAL ip address" and "reconfigure his
| router" so it appears they might be talking about 10.0.0.0/8
| addresses.
 
| sschueller wrote:
| "Our apologies, unfortunately our website is currently
| unavailable in most European countries due to GDPR rules."
| 
| It's 2021, Come on.
| 
| Also I'm in Switzerland which is not in the EU and not part of
| the GDPR.
 
  | bpodgursky wrote:
  | This website owes you nothing.
 
  | portemonnaie wrote:
  | Why should they bother to cater to EU rulings?
 
    | greenwich26 wrote:
    | Evidently they don't, since I live in the EU and I was able
    | to bypass their retarded IP-block in one click.
 
    | lucb1e wrote:
    | Well they do. If they didn't care and weren't planning to
    | comply with EU rulings, they wouldn't have put a block in
    | place to avoid processing data of EU citizens.
    | 
    | (Also, 90% of complying with GDPR is just ethics -- tell if
    | you sell data to third parties, ask consent if you want to do
    | nonessential processing, etc. -- and 10% is adding
    | boilerplate text like reiterating your rights. But that's a
    | bit of a separate discussion, I just feel like most people
    | are not aware of this when starting these discussions and it
    | might be good to know when talking about the topic.)
 
| [deleted]
 
| underseacables wrote:
| How long do we reach a point until the police finally recognize
| an IP address is not a person?
 
  | sathackr wrote:
  | Don't think the police were involved here? Regardless the [bad]
  | police will never care and the good ones are likely mostly
  | ignorant.
  | 
  | It's the judges and DAs that need to learn.
  | 
  | Even more so now with more carriers doing CGNAT (and this
  | number will go up as IPv4 gets more and more expensive.)
 
    | elliekelly wrote:
    | There isn't a DA involved because it isn't a criminal matter
    | and there isn't a judge involved (yet) because there isn't a
    | law suit (yet). It's the local school board who needs to
    | learn but I suspect they care more about saving face than
    | this little boy's education or even their own. Here's hoping
    | their appeal to the state board of education goes well.
 
| [deleted]
 
| ratww wrote:
| Archive copy: https://archive.is/OiQir
 
  | WarOnPrivacy wrote:
  | Appreciated
 
| ratww wrote:
| _> but four other students who did not appear to be Zoom bombers
| were also listed as having Malachi's public IP address, an
| impossibility since they were not in the same house_
| 
| Could be Zoom messing up their logs, but could also be NAT from
| the provider.
| 
| A few years ago, me and my sister noticed we had the same IPv4
| address, despite not living in the same household. We had
| different IPv6, though. It seems to be becoming more and more
| prevalent due to IPv4 exhaustion.
 
  | jcomis wrote:
  | also:
  | 
  |  _> Teachers also said Malachi's camera was on and he did not
  | appear to be doing anything unusual _
  | 
  | So he was supposedly doing this while on camera and in class?
  | This case seems so absurd.
 
    | wearywanderer wrote:
    | While I agree the case is obviously absurd, I'm a bit
    | confused what sort of evidence you think the webcam would
    | give. In the hypothetical scenario where he did what he's
    | accused of, and did it while on webcam, what would the webcam
    | show? Probably just him looking at his screen, with maybe
    | some typing noises? That wouldn't be evidence of _anything_ ,
    | neither innocence nor guilt.
 
      | spoonalious wrote:
      | One of the things he's accused of of shouting racial slurs
 
  | danellis wrote:
  | You missed the worst part:
  | 
  | > ... said Scott Moulton, a Woodstock-based forensics expert
  | hired by the attorney working on Malachi's case.
  | 
  | This forensics "expert" should know this.
 
  | valleyer wrote:
  | Yeah, sounds possibly like:
  | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier-grade_NAT
 
    | dreamcompiler wrote:
    | That was my first thought.
    | 
    | I wonder what software reported the IP address? If it's the
    | Zoom client then it's obviously meaningless because it's
    | guaranteed to be in a private IP address range (if it's
    | IPv4). If it's the Zoom server and CGN is being used by the
    | student's ISP, then it's equally meaningless because while
    | that will be a public IP address, it could be shared by 100
    | households.
    | 
    | I'm also assuming the "experts" didn't make the bone-headed
    | mistake of failing to verify the IP address was in a public
    | range, but I've seen dumber errors.
 
  | matja wrote:
  | This is DS-Lite (Dual Stack). Entire regions of ISP users may
  | share a single IPv4 address. There are some IPv4-only websites
  | I visit that show a CloudFlare captcha on every single visit
  | (for 30 mins), presumably because they see a huge number of
  | requests from this one NAT IP.
 
    | ratww wrote:
    | Interesting! I was not familiar with the term DS-Lite!
    | 
    | https://techmusa.com/dual-stack-lite/
 
      | m463 wrote:
      | or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPv6_transition_mechanism#
      | Dual...
 
  | PurpleFoxy wrote:
  | This is possible. Many users can be sharing the same IPv4 using
  | CG-NAT. I have found that when using mobile internet, every
  | site that uses IP bans has already banned me for a previous
  | users actions.
  | 
  | It's incredibly irresponsible to take action against someone
  | based on their IP address alone.
 
    | olyjohn wrote:
    | Starlink uses CG NAT for IPv4 and just recently started
    | dishing out IPv6 addresses.
 
| zu03776 wrote:
| https://web.archive.org/web/20210522204453/https://ajc.com/n...
 
| [deleted]
 
| KaoruAoiShiho wrote:
| Sounds like a story well suited for gofundme.
 
| diogenesjunior wrote:
| when the zoom ip is sus
 
| lostlogin wrote:
| How is a suspension that long even vaguely appropriate? At some
| point the school is just abandoning the kid and their future.
| 
| If the kid did it there needs to be a punishment, but surely
| education is a key part of what needs to happen?
 
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-05-22 23:00 UTC)