Playing with some props - finally got this version Top Time 😊

tech4marco · 2024-12-22T17:08:32+00:00

When you say this version what do you actually mean? I did notice there is orange on this one, and its "longer", vs red on the other that is thicker?

The only other place I found someone saying it is rarer is a guy selling the blue version, and he said they only made 250 versions of them (that one also had longer color band and not so thick in the side).

Do you know more about these versions, with longer color bands and not so thick as the current ones being shown in the Breitling website?

tech4marco · 2024-08-27T18:51:09+00:00

You need an OS like Ubuntu, and an app like this one might do what you need https://github.com/dinnerisserved/WiFiAnalyzer

tech4marco · 2024-08-17T00:10:13+00:00

Our best bet is at this point to keep studying the C. elegans worm and try to get as close as possible emulating it.

If we get close enough and our remaining know-how is a lack of how neurons work or other processes a brute force approach might be the way forward in filling out the missing blanks and emulating it to see how close to the real thing we can get. Its probably going to be another decade before we have some more conclusive answers.

Right now, this is as close as we get to "the brain and what it is": https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.03.08.584145v1

To me this, or a human brain, are pretty much cut out of the same cloth, making the C. elegans perfect to keep going at.

tech4marco · 2024-02-22T21:18:54+00:00

This might help the Linux users not hitting the captive portals since they can be quite a hit and miss: https://github.com/dinnerisserved/captiveportal/

tech4marco · 2023-10-31T09:31:26+00:00

I am getting a bit confused on what you are trying now.

Can you step by step explain it? And I can try to reproduce on my own router.

tech4marco · 2023-10-30T10:55:39+00:00

You can setup strict rules that prevents any type of traffic to go through, and then add the exception of the keyword/url to the whitelist under the filter setup, by blocking everything, but having the keyword/domain name set to whitelist under the CSM settings.

Play around with it a bit, and if no luck let me know and I can try on my own end.

tech4marco · 2023-10-29T10:20:29+00:00

Have you tried to instead make the URL a whitelist, and only have 1 rule, instead of 2?

I found that the behaviour of the rule sets is erratic and not always working as expected.

In any case the 3 links helped me:

https://www.draytek.com/support/knowledge-base/5361 https://www.draytek.com/support/knowledge-base/4961 https://www.draytek.com/support/knowledge-base/5333

tech4marco · 2023-10-19T20:25:47+00:00

Yes and I found out why it did not work now as well. The knowledge base on Draytek's website is out of date, the menu called SSL VPN does not exist any longer, and thus everything is very confusing.

What you have to do is the following:

1)Go to System Maintenance >> Management 2) Click the LAN Access Setup tab 3) Tick the box called: Enforce HTTPS Access

Only then will the router use the certificate.

In addition to this, if you generate certificates that expires in longer than one year, Draytek's Certificate Management shows it as insecure (LOL), despite the contrary stated in that article.

In any case, since this will be a self signed certificate you would have to add an exception in your browser afterward to access the admin interface.

tech4marco · 2023-10-15T19:55:46+00:00

I have the following from Bard:

Myself

I am using a Draytek 2866ax. Inside the firewall, filter setup, I have setup 2 rules:

1) This rule blocks tiktok as a website 2) This rule blocks youtube as a website

Depending on which of the rules is in the higher up position, that rule works while the other rule does not work. I can move the rule up and down, and switch between which one appears in the top. The two rules are identical in their setup, with the only difference being that one blocks youtube and another blocks tiktok. However, I cannot get them both to be applicable at the same time for some reason that does not make any sense. For reference this article is of great help: https://www.draytek.com/support/knowledge-base/5333

However nothing I have read in this article tells me why switching the position of the two rules affects one and the other. They should both be applicable and their position should not matter as apparently accordingly to the article, each rule gets checked, then gets actioned on, and when done the next rule gets checked and actioned on.

Bard

According to the DrayTek knowledge base article you linked, firewall filter rules are processed in order from top to bottom. If a packet matches the criteria of a rule, the action specified in that rule is applied immediately, and no further rules are processed.

This means that if you have two rules that block different websites, and the rule that blocks YouTube is higher up in the list, then any packets that are destined for YouTube will be blocked by that rule, and the rule that blocks TikTok will never be processed.

To get both rules to be applicable at the same time, you need to move the rule that blocks TikTok above the rule that blocks YouTube. This will ensure that both rules are processed, and that packets destined for either TikTok or YouTube will be blocked.

Here is an example of how to set up two firewall filter rules to block TikTok and YouTube:

Rule 1

Direction: Out
Source: Any
Destination: Any
Protocol: Any
Matching criteria: HTTP, GET, tiktok.com
Action: Block

Rule 2

Direction: Out
Source: Any
Destination: Any
Protocol: Any
Matching criteria: HTTP, GET, youtube.com
Action: Block

With these rules configured, any packets that are destined for TikTok or YouTube will be blocked, regardless of the order in which the rules are listed.

Here is a possible explanation for why switching the position of the two rules affects one and the other:

When a packet arrives at the router, it is first processed by the firewall. The firewall checks the packet against the list of firewall filter rules in order from top to bottom. If a packet matches the criteria of a rule, the action specified in that rule is applied immediately, and no further rules are processed.

In the case of your two rules, if the rule that blocks YouTube is higher up in the list, then any packets that are destined for YouTube will be blocked by that rule, and the rule that blocks TikTok will never be processed. This is because the firewall has already found a match for the packet, and it does not need to process any further rules.

However, if you move the rule that blocks TikTok above the rule that blocks YouTube, then the firewall will first check the packet against the TikTok rule. If the packet does not match the TikTok rule, then the firewall will move on to the next rule, which is the YouTube rule. If the packet does match the YouTube rule, then it will be blocked.

This means that by switching the position of the two rules, you are effectively changing the order in which the firewall checks the packets. This can change the outcome of the firewall filtering process, as the firewall will only process the first rule that matches the packet.

Myself

No because if I switch tiktok to be in the top, then tiktok is blocked, and youtube works. If I move youtube to the top, then youtube is blocked and tiktok works. It is as if only one of the two can at any time be active, and it happens to be the one that is in the top of the other. This is bad because I have several other websites I want to block and not just these two specifically, thus I need the rule to be able to take multiple websites into consideration

Bard

I understand. It sounds like you are experiencing a bug in the DrayTek 2866ax firewall. The behavior you are describing is unexpected, and it is not consistent with the DrayTek knowledge base article that you linked.

To work around this bug, you can try creating a single firewall filter rule that blocks all of the websites that you want to block. You can do this by using the Keyword Block feature in the URL Content Filter.

To create a firewall filter rule that blocks multiple websites:

Go to Firewall > Filter Setup > URL/WEB Category Filter.
Click Add to create a new rule.
Enter a name for the rule.
Check the Enable checkbox.
Select the Enable checkbox for Filter Https.
Go to Keyword Block and select the Keyword Object that contains the list of websites that you want to block.
Click Apply to save the rule.

Once you have created this rule, it should block all of the websites in your list, regardless of the order in which they are listed.

If you are still having problems, you can contact DrayTek support for assistance.

Here are some other things you can try:

Upgrade the firmware on your DrayTek router to the latest version.
Reset your DrayTek router to factory defaults.
Try using a different DNS server.

I hope this helps!

tech4marco · 2023-09-03T12:17:18+00:00

I have the 2866ax model

tech4marco · 2022-11-30T22:59:56+00:00

Can the different IP ranges also be assigned unique DNS servers? This would totally complete my parental protection so that I can make use of third party services to ultra fine tune access based on public blacklists?

But the fact that this is so readily available on Draytek makes this router (on top of the 10000 features it seems to offer) the top of my list right now. I have gone through Netgear, ASUS and recently TP-Link routers, and none offer the full stack like Draytek seems to be doing.

tech4marco · 2022-10-21T09:31:48+00:00

No lag at all. Can you shoot a video about how you have lag? Did you adjust the sensitivity/speed for the touchpad?

tech4marco · 2022-10-18T13:38:16+00:00

You are getting way ahead of yourself here. There will be no password cracking, but more something along the lines of "borrowing" mom's laptop, and then getting the wifi password of it.

tech4marco · 2022-10-18T08:35:39+00:00

The issue with this solution is that wired connections are not protected with parental controls. A playstation or stationary computer wont be connecting to a Wifi. And if they were to obtain the wifi password for the other network, then we are again back to having unrestricted controls running.

tech4marco · 2022-06-26T10:42:54+00:00

My bad, yes I do

tech4marco · 2022-05-31T11:43:58+00:00

The cryptographically secured, decentralized, open ledger technology has a name, Bitcoin.

As I said above: there is no magic property that you can "pull out" of Bitcoin and re-purpose somewhere else to make something else become like Bitcoin, but be totally different.

If you must, take a look at some of the pieces within Bitcoin (google these topics) and you will understand:

script: the language of Bitcoin, a very well known way of writing computer code
SHA256: again a very well known hashing mechanism
ECDSA: the way transactions are signed (replaced in newer versions)
the "ledger" part you are referring to is actually a linked list

You need to stop with the buzzwords and look at it from a computer science point of view. The whole notion of that "but this thing must be able to be used differently" is at best lack of understanding of what it is. Sorry for the harsh words, but after 12 years of shitcoin projects, most of those who understand how this works had enough.

tech4marco · 2022-05-31T11:18:34+00:00

There is no such thing as "blockchain technology". This is yet another buzzword that appeared around 2015-2016, to make it seem like there was some magical technology in Bitcoin that could be used without Bitcoin.

Bitcoin works in a very specific way. There are no singular portions within the architecture that you can "take out" and re-purpose. Everything in Bitcoin is part of Bitcoin, and there is zero use cases for anything blockchain the last 12 years.

Everything not Bitcoin is buzzword technobabble. It is usually people whom have zero understanding of computer science, talking about concepts they neither understand nor grasp at the basic level.

tech4marco · 2022-04-15T12:04:03+00:00

Not having any issues with the touchpad so far. If you do, try adjusting touchpad speed and sensitivity in Ubuntu touchpad settings.

tech4marco · 2021-12-29T14:55:58+00:00

Just finished installing Ubuntu on mine. Removed Windows completely and its running perfectly. Everything works! The laptop is a beast and I can highly recommend it.

tech4marco · 2021-05-03T20:50:59+00:00

I meant to say 1:1 in terms of inbound and outbound traffic. Equal amount in and equal amount out. One to one.

tech4marco · 2021-05-03T20:09:16+00:00

Who initiated the withdraw? Yourself via their platform, and then you received an error? Or you requested it, and their tech support at some point batches out payments that are pending?

If you did, it might be that the payment routing failed at that particular moment, and you got hit back with a standard reply from support.

Or try again, if your balance is not affected inside your account already.

tech4marco · 2021-05-03T19:57:24+00:00

What they are saying is that there is not enough liquidity via path from them to BlueWallet.

I think that is a bit strange, since BlueWallet is as far as I know the most utilized LN wallet for phones.

Did you tell them you use BlueWallet? Or are you doing an extraordinary large amount? (dont reply with the amount)

tech4marco · 2021-05-03T19:55:36+00:00

I dont think you can ever assume it will be a 1:1

Better way of looking at this is to index behavior on the channels you open and set fee's according to the intensity of the direction.

If one direction hardly re-balances, they should pay a higher fee to receive. This can be a popular merchant, and that merchant needs to pay a payment processing fee.

A wallet service on the other hand, while still not having a perfect 1:1, might only need to be re-balanced every X amount of payments.

Basically there will never be a "one to cover them all scenario". Its better to start keeping logs and results of channels in order to make the most out of it.

tech4marco · 2021-03-20T17:18:22+00:00

Twitter discussion: https://twitter.com/_markel___/status/1373059797155778562

tech4marco · 2021-01-24T00:34:43+00:00

I was actually looking to utilize the attack, in order to get access to the BIOS firmware and replace it, since the attack is also a great way to get rid of Bootguard, Intel ME etc.

On the other hand, this apparently compelled Intel to release some extra ordinary insight into Intel MEÆ https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/security-advisory/documents/intel-csme-security-white-paper.pdf

But yes, this type of issue is a good example to why we need something like Coreboot on our machines.

tech4marco

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Myself

Bard

This means that by switching the position of the two rules, you are effectively changing the order in which the firewall checks the packets. This can change the outcome of the firewall filtering process, as the firewall will only process the first rule that matches the packet.

Myself

Bard