buellwinkle 0 Posted July 1, 2014 If you use NOIP for free or paid DDNS to access your cameras remotely and try to connect to a NOIP domain, it’s not working. The NOIP.COM site is also down. Microsoft filed for an ex part temporary restraining order against NOIP and basically shut them down today without even a hearing. So the millions of people that use NOIP are screwed. Thanks Microsoft for shutting down NOIP without even allowing for a fair trial first. I can't believe judges are so dumb as to allow this to happen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ak357 0 Posted July 1, 2014 If you use NOIP for free or paid DDNS to access your cameras remotely and try to connect to a NOIP domain, it’s not working. The NOIP.COM site is also down. Microsoft filed for an ex part temporary restraining order against NOIP and basically shut them down today without even a hearing. So the millions of people that use NOIP are screwed. Thanks Microsoft for shutting down NOIP without even allowing for a fair trial first. I can't believe judges are so dumb as to allow this to happen. Old news viewtopic.php?f=1&t=41584 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dexterash 0 Posted July 2, 2014 I wonder why it's OK to use 3rd party tools/services in a Closed Circuit television system. We're talking about security around here, privacy, private video feeds or more, not webcams pointed at bays, bars or something like this. Closing the gap, what would happen in a DNS poison attack(or redirect by DNS) with MITM collaboration? A phising that would, silently, give access to surveillance systems that should provide "security". Besides the fact that Microsoft did take an unannounced action(IMHO, a good move), what if all Video Security Systems that use NO-IP would've been compromised and redirected to others? Would you be happy to be exposed? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
buellwinkle 0 Posted July 2, 2014 First, understand that the reason we need DDNS is because our ISP's are stuck on antiquated IPV4 technology. If ISP's would allow IPV6 you would not need port forwarding, you would not have a dynamic IP address and your security risks would be much lower because each device would have it's own IP address. So DDNS is a symptom of a much larger problem. If my ISP's including AT&T, Cox & Charter provided IPV6 I would be all over it. Companies like dyndns and noip would go out of business. You are right, after all who do you trust with your computer security more than Microsoft and why muddy the waters by allowing the accused to defend themselves in a U.S. court Yet every day, computers using Microsoft products are affected by viruses, malware. These have a way bigger impact on security of my cameras than DDNS. I just wish someone would go to court, ask a judge to shut down Microsoft for a few months while we sort out why Windows is a security risk to billions of people worldwide. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dexterash 0 Posted July 2, 2014 First, understand that the reason we need DDNS is because our ISP's are stuck on antiquated IPV4 technology. True If ISP's would allow IPV6 you would not need port forwarding, you would not have a dynamic IP address and your security risks would be much lower because each device would have it's own IP address. False, since routers are routers... So DDNS is a symptom of a much larger problem. If my ISP's including AT&T, Cox & Charter provided IPV6 I would be all over it. Companies like dyndns and noip would go out of business. Use private DDNS, not public ones. Any mid to upper level router should support custom DDNS. Heck, even the DynDNS client update protocol can be emulated. You are right, after all who do you trust with your computer security more than Microsoft and why muddy the waters by allowing the accused to defend themselves in a U.S. court Yet every day, computers using Microsoft products are affected by viruses, malware. These have a way bigger impact on security of my cameras than DDNS. I just wish someone would go to court, ask a judge to shut down Microsoft for a few months while we sort out why Windows is a security risk to billions of people worldwide. I'm a Linux user, fan and all others. Yet, I do understand your concern. Microsoft (as from what I can deduct now) took a straight shot at something. Microsoft offers a product. A PC with Windows 8.1 powered down can't be attacked. A PC with Windows 7 without an Internet connection and no external influences (like USB sticks) is safe. Microsoft can't secure the thing that is between the monitor and the chair, nor can me, you or others... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
buellwinkle 0 Posted July 3, 2014 It's back up. I just hope noip is able to get some money out of Microsoft for their poor judgement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
catseyenu 0 Posted July 3, 2014 It's back up. I just hope noip is able to get some money out of Microsoft for their poor judgement. +1 Isn't interfering with business across state lines a felony? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dexterash 0 Posted July 4, 2014 It's back up. I just hope noip is able to get some money out of Microsoft for their poor judgement. Buellwinkle, no offense, but Microsoft did a [somehow] bad thing, but for a good cause. Cyberthreats are rising. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dexterash 0 Posted July 4, 2014 +1 Isn't interfering with business across state lines a felony? Every Virus, Malware, Trojan, BotNets and other cyberthreats interfere and disrupt business across state borders, country borders etc. How many of them have you seen caught and convicted? And the damages and costs to businesses and individuals are high. Too high. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
