Mar 14, 2018, 12:45 AM

@nemesis I don't...exactly understand why you're fighting this so much when the general Infosec and IT community disagrees with you. So I'll leave you with reading from sources that clearly have no idea what they're talking about.

NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology): https://csrc.nist.gov/publications/detail/sp/800-119/final#pubs-abstract-header

OWASP (a bunch of chumps who are an international organization renowned as the tip of the spear in dealing with web/info vulnerabilities. It's OWASP top 10 is considered a fair standard for the top 10 security risks at ANY given time. They don't know anything, but they wrote a completely bogus thing on IPv6 vulnerabilities that I'm sure you knew about): https://www.owasp.org/index.php/File:Vulnerability_Scanning_in_an_IPv6_World.pdf

If you would like to try ARP spoofing using IPv6 on an IPv4 network, here you go: https://insinuator.net/2016/03/multicast-based-ipv6-neighbor-spoofing-response-behavior-on-cisco-devices/

Anyway, I'm gonna stop there. You're out of your damned mind if you think there isn't a widely sploited IPv6 vs IPv4 vulnerability for MITM attacks, and the rest of the IT world as a whole disagrees with you. Who am I to say, though? Maybe they're all wrong about their bogus terms such as boguns and vulnerabilities and 200+ videos on YouTube about IPv6 MITM attacks and IP spoofing. I'm not going to argue with you about this. You were factually wrong from the start. Let it go.

And I assure you in no way that I'm not reading, right now, about how to use socat to tunnel IPv6 through IPv4.

Anyway, this got derailed. Don't listen to this guy (he doesn't know shit) and an IPv6 attack against a home router that isn't protected from it is a potential vulnerability.

The point is that IP information gathered by MUs are a potential attack vector.