Top
Best
New

Posted by Rasbora 16 hours ago

Residential proxies detected on White House network(layer3intel.com)
https://krebsonsecurity.com/2026/11/want-to-rent-an-internet...
1141 points | 372 comments
btown 15 hours ago|
The danger here, of course, is that while these compromised devices are currently being monetized in a relatively benign way (other than bandwidth costs to the user, which to be sure can be nontrivial)… it would be naive to assume that there isn't a Command and Control capability that can assign less benign tasking - or can be compromised to do so.

This also puts some of the troubling reports that politicians were bringing phones into SCIFs into context…

mzajc 15 hours ago||
> benign

On a server that used to get below 1k HTTP requests a day, I've had several cases of mass scraping from these botnets exceeding 100req/s. The web is getting harder and harder to use due to all the anti-bot mechanisms site operators had to put up.

How is DDOSing every site on the web benign?

nucleardog 15 hours ago|||
Relatively benign.

A compromised device inside the White House network could presumably be doing something _much_ worse than participating in a DDOS against random websites.

mcv 2 hours ago|||
And it's right there in the second line of the article:

> One of the proxy services is a Russian company whose founder’s web hosting business was ground zero for cyberattacks against election systems in Arizona and Illinois in 2016.

Surely a Russian company known for cyberattacks against the US having direct access to the White House network is far more serious than just DDOSing random websites. This is espionage at the highest level. (Again.)

KaiserPro 2 hours ago||
The owner of the proxy is not great, but the fact that its an open door to snoop on everything else on the entire network is the realy fucker there.
sandworm101 24 minutes ago||||
>> A compromised device inside the White House network

A whitehouse network. It isn't like everything done in that building run through a single wifi router. It is likely an unprotected network for personal use with zero connecting to anything important.

lakeviewterrace 15 hours ago|||
[flagged]
hackernud3s 15 hours ago|||
Apparently they do not though.
Terr_ 14 hours ago||
There were experts but the Republican White House fired them:

https://techcrunch.com/2025/03/11/doge-axes-cisa-red-team-st...

Perhaps some of them annoyed the President's illegally-appointed mega-donor, if they spoke out against giving root access to all his unvetted junior flunkies.

FireBeyond 14 hours ago||
The same junior flunkies who would do things like go to government agencies, create administrative accounts, which would then, often with minutes, be seen connecting from Russia and Eastern Europe with the correct credentials.
10111001 4 hours ago|||
> The same junior flunkies who would do things like go to government agencies, create administrative accounts, which would then, often with minutes, be seen connecting from Russia and Eastern Europe with the correct credentials.

They are young and think they are very smart. What could go wrong?

brador 3 hours ago||
For anyone new, the above are talking about trump and Elons DOGE gov department.
trismus 14 hours ago|||
Source?
adzm 13 hours ago|||
> Daniel J. Berulis, a cybersecurity architect with the NLRB, filed a whistleblower complaint alleging that within 15 minutes of DOGE team members creating new user credentials and demanding administrative access, multiple login attempts using those exact credentials originated from a Russian IP address

https://www.npr.org/2025/04/15/nx-s1-5355896/doge-nlrb-elon-...

Terr_ 13 hours ago|||
Oh come on, search-engines have gone downhill, but not that far downhill! You already know it involves "DOGE" and "Russia" and "credentials", that ought to be enough:

> Berulis alleged in the affidavit that there attempted logins to NLRB systems from an IP address in Russia in the days after DOGE accessed the systems. He told Reuters Tuesday that the attempted logins apparently included correct username and password combinations but were rejected by location-related conditional access policies.

* https://www.reuters.com/technology/cybersecurity/whistleblow...

* https://www.npr.org/2025/04/15/nx-s1-5355896/doge-nlrb-elon-...

trismus 11 hours ago|||
I could have this entire conversation with ai too.
lukan 10 hours ago||
You literally asked for a source and when provide by a human it was not enough? Maybe you should rather engage with AI completely then?
trismus 8 hours ago||
It was enough and I appreciated it with the context, and conversation ensued. Not sure why I was scolded for doing so, that's what I meant by being able to have the conversation with AI - this whole interaction is defunct if we're going by the logic that it could be had another way.. I didn't want to go research it myself, I wanted to know where my peers are sourcing this novel-to-me information from.
xtiansimon 32 minutes ago||
Maybe the reaction stems from the low effort? "source?" Personally, sometimes I find a short command like this in a discussion forum insulting to my effort. Or maybe it's just that I still like sentences, and others are using text message conversational forms. idk. wtf.
what 12 hours ago|||
> often

You have one alleged example.

Terr_ 12 hours ago||
> You have one alleged example.

That sounds like being deliberately obtuse and arguing in bad-faith. Are you going to "nuh uh" all the journalists and lawyers until you are personally given raw TCP dumps?

Behold, from the sworn affidavit of the DevSecOps guy with the top-secret clearance, as included in a whistleblower disclosure to Congress [0]:

> There were more than 20 such attempts, and what is particularly concerning is that many of these login attempts occurred within 15 minutes of the accounts being created by DOGE engineers.

So there it is, now don't go moving the goalposts.

[0] https://whistlebloweraid.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/2025...

2III7 14 hours ago||||
Read "This is how they tell me the world ends".

Or let me sum it up for you. The government doesn't have the money to employ top security experts and top security experts don't actually want to work for the government.

altairprime 14 hours ago|||
Sometimes, top security experts often can’t work for the U.S. government even if they do want to due to being ineligible for security clearance from checks notes gender and sexuality mistrust, non-zero drug usage lifetime to date, formerly grayhats, have ever sought mental health care, and/or anti-authoritarian viewpoints.
lakeviewterrace 14 hours ago|||
To be fair, the track record for mentally unwell people in positions of trust isn't great.
dylan604 14 hours ago|||
Before the most recent elections, people voted for an unwell person to lead the country. So it's not just someone can obtain the position, but that people actually chose to put one in office. Twice. Although, it was less well known on the first one.
what 11 hours ago||
[flagged]
StilesCrisis 12 hours ago||||
"Saw a therapist once" =/= "unwell."

In fact avoiding therapy at all costs is a good sign of trouble.

lynx97 4 hours ago||
[flagged]
maxbond 12 hours ago||||
The track record for preventing people in positions of trust from seeking out mental health care is terrible. It's just brushing problems under the rug and waiting for them to turn rancid. Don't interpret not seeking help as the nonexistence of a problem, especially if their career depends on it.
altairprime 11 hours ago|||
Does the Department of Defense still have a clearance disqual for ADHD?
swiftcoder 1 hour ago|||
> The government doesn't have the money to employ top security experts and top security experts don't actually want to work for the

To be fair, they had quite a number of security experts on payroll before the current administration laid them all off...

manyatoms 14 hours ago||||
I'd be stunned if they're paying anywhere near enough to attract top talent
dhosek 14 hours ago|||
I applied to USDS in 2023, the process took nearly a year and ended with them just ghosting me after two interview rounds. Pay was capped (by law) below my target salary but at a level that I would accept as it would have been fully remote, but there was also a term limit on the job which meant I would have at most two years in the position.

It’s not just the pay, there’s a lot of structural elements that mean that the potential talent pool is less than desired.

vlan0 14 hours ago||||
Th best folks I know wouldn't touch a government job, no matter the pay.
fhub 13 hours ago||
There was a period of time where it seemed (as an outsider) that they were attracting good talent. This was when Megan Smith was CTO. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan_Smith.
alt227 14 hours ago|||
Dont they usually bargain work against jailtime for domestic cyber criminals?
vlan0 14 hours ago|||
Bruh do you remember snowden? The government is HEAVILY sub-contracted. Accenture? Really? My guy...
miki123211 4 hours ago||||
> The web is getting harder and harder to use

What are you doing to make this true?

I'm a screen reader user (which is as "weird and unusual" as it gets when fingerprinting mechanisms are concerned), and I am not really noticing much difference versus 2022 or so. Sure, there's little bits of anubis here or there, and a few sites (which I know for a fact are experiencing targeted DDoS attacks unrelated to AI scraping) having annoying Cloudflare verification screens, but that's about it.

My setup (other than the screen reader) is as vanilla as it gets. Safari, AdGuard for Ad blocking, no VPN except work VPN when necessary, no PiHole, no settings changed. If you're using something more esoteric, maybe try going mainstream and see if that improves your experience.

coke12 4 hours ago||
What do you mean by “anubis” here?
account42 4 hours ago|||
It's a DRM middleware used to harass users of customized and privacy respecting browsers which is popular with many smaller websites.
Aldqueath 3 hours ago|||
I am not sure what you are doing to get "harassed" by anubis but I use privacy respecting browsers with ad blockers and vpns myself, and anubis is by far the least annoying, almost invisible even.

In comparison I get cloudflare recaptcha on every site that uses it, sometimes multiple times per session and sometimes not even letting me pass at all due to "error".

And if the website uses Google recaptcha then I close the tab because I know it will just end up in endless recaptcha hell.

account42 2 hours ago|||
If you need to compare the project to Google and Cloudflare in order to look less bad that's not exactly a good sign.
jacquesm 2 hours ago|||
Google too. 'We are detecting unusual traffic from your address'. I don't know how often I've seen this and there isn't a byte that goes in or out on this connection without monitoring so if it really would be 'unusual' I would hope I would be on it before Google told me, especially not from a session that's been active for days or weeks.
barbafant 2 hours ago||||
Is that the one that shows an anime figure holding a magnifyig glass while it is checking your browser?
VorpalWay 1 hour ago||
Yes, and at least in the past it did proof of work to verify that it wasn't a bot. Though apparently that is no longer effective against all bots.
tempfile 2 hours ago||||
Please substantiate this claim. What do you think makes it DRM? What kind of browser are you using that results in "harassment"? I use tor browser and other oddball firefox forks all the time, Anubis never gave me any trouble. I think it just requires you to compute some hashes.
kasey_junk 1 hour ago||
It’s a software tool that specifically exists to allow content creators to enforce rules about how their content is used. It meets the dictionary definition of DRM.

It’s DRM that I think of as silly larping that doesn’t really bother me, but it’s clearly drm.

philipwhiuk 2 hours ago|||
This is such a wild re-imagining of 'preventing uncountable AI crawlers perform DoS attacks on a whim to make line go up'
furst-blumier 4 hours ago||||
Not OP but most likely https://anubis.techaro.lol/
rrr_oh_man 4 hours ago||
[flagged]
kuschku 4 hours ago|||
https://anubis.techaro.lol/
franga2000 4 hours ago||||
1) The proxy isn't the scraper. There are plenty of scrapers not using residential proxies.

2) They're clearly talking from the perspective of the user and network admin. A residential proxy virus is in fact quite benign for both.

3) No matter what, DoS is quite a low priority in terms of security. And it's not even really DDoS, you'll know a real DDoS when you're on the receiving end.

account42 2 hours ago||
> A residential proxy virus is in fact quite benign for both.

That's only because it isn't being prosecuted appropriately.

franga2000 1 hour ago||
Let's not get ahead of ourselves... If someone plants a bomb under your car, you drive to work, then it blows up while you're out for lunch, should you be prosecuted?

I'm all for creating consequences for people who negligently don't secure their systems and people get hurt because of it, but people who installed a mobile game that has a proxy library in it? Please, chill.

BeetleB 13 hours ago||||
> The web is getting harder and harder to use due to all the anti-bot mechanisms site operators had to put up.

Indeed. I recently set up a bot on my local machine that I can interact with via Telegram. I gave it the ability to retrieve the contents of a URL via Playwright (with modifications). Basic things like getting the Readability view and getting the site as Markdown with links.

I was essentially mimicking the feature OpenAI etc offer where it can do a web search for you and get you the answer you seek. I just didn't want to pay a company for that feature.

It's not autonomous. It only acts when I tell it to. The actual search is via the Kagi API, but the URL contents is via Playwright. I also ensured it can't do lots of requests at a time. There's a mandatory (random) sleep of between 1 and 5 seconds between two requests.

In less than a week, I've been flagged. When I do a Google search (as a human), I have to prove I'm human. Many sites have simply blocked me - I can't buy stuff from various vendors[1], I cannot access several news sites, etc.

The thing is, I didn't really access that many sites with the bot! At most it's the equivalent of someone mildly addicted to the web. Yet they caught me quickly.

Obviously, I disabled the bot's capability to get site content. I wonder how long my IP will be in the blacklist.

I know some people will say "Good riddance" to the outcome and to what I did. I'd love to have a real, serious discussion on whether what I did was immoral. But whatever your thoughts on the matter, do ponder over the fact that the system has made it hard for average Joes like you and me to have this "feature", but if you pay a giant tech company a monthly fee, you can have it.

[1] Thankfully, Amazon didn't block me. In the past I'd avoid them, but now I'm in the dilemma where I don't want to buy stuff from sites that make it difficult for me to buy stuff from them!

nostrademons 4 hours ago|||
I think that major gateways like Google and Cloudflare and Akamai are doing things like TLS-fingerprinting and smearing.

I normally use a VPN to access the Internet. It's an ordinary consumer-grade VPN, and I use it for pretty innocuous things like watching the international versions of Netflix or avoiding being geographically-profiled and charged more when I book travel. The VPN itself, I'm sure, is being used for all sorts of naughty stuff: when I look it up in whatismyip, it comes up as VPN, "abuse detected", and "residential proxy detected". I expect to get blocked occasionally on it and just pause the VPN then.

What I found surprising is that pausing the VPN doesn't always clear the CAPTCHAs. The next request will also fail, sometimes. For a while I was wondering if I have a residential proxy on my network, but I went hunting with lsof and bandwidth monitoring and a list of all the open connections through my router, and it seems clear. Yet even with VPN disabled, I'll get CAPTCHAs from Google and Cloudflare.

I suspect they're using browser/TLS fingerprinting and then smearing the results of that across bad IPs. If you connect to them through a known-bad IP, they not only will CAPTCHA you, but they will record a fingerprint of any data they can. Then if you connect again with that fingerprint, regardless of the IP, they block that too.

Ironically, if you are actually malicious, you can get around this pretty easily. Because you'll know not to use a fingerprintable browser, or to rotate fingerprints. So you have one completely separate identity on a given IP (that is not yours), and if it gets blocked, you roll up another completely separate identity on a different IP. But this is too much work for an ordinary consumer who just wants to keep their IP private. So you end up with this excluded middle where the only rational strategies are to either do exactly what the website expects you to do (with no funny business, even if it's innocuous), or to go whole-hog as the aggressor where you're determined to skirt their policies no matter what, and if you're doing that you might as well amortize the effort by extracting everything of value you can from them.

hnthrow10282910 6 minutes ago||||
I just did this as well. I also added paywall bypass by default along with inline article chat. The internet is such trash these days.

I made my modifications at the network level and auto redirect a configurable set of sites to go to reader mode/paywall bypass by default with a MITM proxy and a custom CA cert I trust

proxyscore 9 hours ago||||
Expect to remain blocked, that's how defense works, some services plenty use will have is bot or known proxy exit node set to true, and some websites use the same defense services, request velocity is just one factor, if you don't have random human like scrolling and jitter with a bot, it's a dead profile walking, metaphorically speaking
itishappy 12 hours ago||||
I don't think this is an immoral application at all from your description, but would that be clear on the receiving end?
cowlevel 12 hours ago||||
Just restart your home router to rotate your IP address.
theGeatZhopa 3 hours ago|||
It depends on the DHCP part and your provider lease time. When you access the Internet through a modem and landline, it's an highly dynamical system, where it's difficult to guarantee every caller/user gets its own IP. Especially when IP sharing is used among the clients. Even more difficult it is with the mobile Internet. It's a constant connection loosing/reconnecting. Actually resetting and freeing up IPs for new devices, the whole time. With cable Internet (the TV cable) one is having a kind of stationary access point. The network provider can see it's topology and it never changes once a leafe has joined the network. I typically have the same access creds over months. Even when I restart my cable modem, it's still the same IP. When I was on modem, I could get a new IP every second of I wanted. Now I have to think twice, because I just can't get a new IP, even if is forcedly, not.
qlte 11 hours ago||||
That is entirely ISP dependent and many don't actually work like that. Your cable modem gets a specific IP for as long as Comcast or whoever sees fit, restarting does nothing on the WAN side.
consp 5 hours ago|||
In my case a downtime of over 4 hours will switch it. Might just be lease time doing its job.
prmoustache 1 hour ago||||
This is simply called the dhcp lease time. Restarting has never forced a change of ip on a system using a dhcp client.
drewnick 8 hours ago|||
True, I've had the same IPv4 address since 2018 on Spectrum despite rebooting at least 10 times.
proxyscore 9 hours ago|||
Doesn't work like that, only on mobile phones you can toggle airplane mode to get a new ip assigned and cgnat makes sure mobile ips are "trusted" , but they fingerprint you beyond ip address
TheDong 8 hours ago|||
> I know some people will say "Good riddance" to the outcome and to what I did.

I will instead say "skill issue".

Using Playwright results in some very obvious and easy to detect fingerprints. I'd expect better of someone on hacker news.

Mine hasn't been detected as far as I can tell, so I know it's possible to do better.

lynx97 4 hours ago|||
elitist nonesense. "Look I am soooo cool, and you are not as cool as me."
DANmode 5 hours ago|||
Weird to hide basic stuff like random mouse-paths, mouse wiggle.
cyanydeez 13 hours ago||||
Compared to, russian intel scraping beyond demented word of mouth.
NavinF 12 hours ago|||
> 100req/s

While your server handles that, what does your CPU do with the other 99% of available cycles?

I run https://bunnystomp.com on an Always Free VM from a major cloud provider. It handles 1,930 req/s at 33 ms latency with no tuning/optimization. It's literally just python behind cloudflare.

mzajc 11 hours ago||
You seem to know a lot about my server. From what I could see, all cores were pinned to 100%, but maybe my budget AMD CPU is hiding fantastical amounts of compute from the kernel. I'd love to know how to make use of it.

I have no idea what the site you linked does, but it doesn't look like a cgit instance to me; that's what got hammered on my end, and when hosting it, one very quickly finds out that many git operations are CPU-bound.

NavinF 32 minutes ago|||
Funny. My site is a search engine and cgit is one of many tarpits that I block. Otherwise the index gets filled with garbage and the crawler hits TCP conn limits because the bytes trickle in too slowly.
fn-mote 10 hours ago|||
If you want credibility from the get-go, you need to be up front about your application. I certainly took it to be a generic host for an unpopular site in your first comment.
yard2010 4 hours ago||
Nah this is hn, just trust people upfront
_alternator_ 13 hours ago|||
I'll just note that "compromised" is perhaps too strong. These services often come from VPN plugins (eg Hola VPN) that lets users watch sports from different restricted geographic regions. There is a trade here that's in the TOs: you get someone else's IP address, they get yours.
jeremyjh 12 hours ago|||
Compromised describes exactly what you are talking about. Any free rider on a network that the operator is unaware of means the device is compromised.
nomel 10 hours ago||
If I'm using one of these services while connected to a guest wifi network, with the usual configuration for guest access (like no intranet connections), is that guest wifi network compromised? What's the threat model?
autoexec 7 hours ago|||
> is that guest wifi network compromised?

I'd say yes since you've allowed random people unauthorized use of the connection. It makes no difference if it's your connection or not. For example, if that proxy gets used as part of a DDoS attack, your device compromised that network.

thefounder 4 hours ago||
how is this different than Tor? You seem a bit on the surveillance side. The computer/network is compromised if someone gains unauthorized access to it not if you share it.
account42 2 hours ago||
TOR doesn't use unsuspecting participants as exit nodes, that's something you have to specificially enable.
shakna 1 hour ago|||
If that guest WiFi network is running inside the White House? Yes, I'd say that is compromised. The threat model being that guests on that network may be diplomatic officials and staff.
jappgar 44 minutes ago||||
That's not how Hola works. You're not sharing your IP with some other Hola user. You're sharing it with bots used for all sorts of good and bad things.
tclancy 12 hours ago|||
What part of that isn’t technically “compromised”? You can argue there’s no evidence of it currently being weaponized but I’d say some shitbird running a free vpn inside the White House is not a good look regardless.
cowlevel 12 hours ago||
We'd need a pedantic definition of "compromised" to be sure
50208 9 hours ago|||
Why wouldn't an adversary be using it to conceal command and control traffic?
lesuorac 15 hours ago|||
> This also puts some of the troubling reports that politicians were bringing phones into SCIFs into context…

I mean politicians are so addicted to twitter the nsa makes special phones…

dylan604 13 hours ago||
Not sure which direction you're intending this. The NSA is making special phones to protect politicians, or to make it easier to ensure they can read everything?
za_creature 13 hours ago|||
Por que no los dos?

It's always better to protect politicians from someone else

lesuorac 13 hours ago|||
Politicians bringing phones isn’t a scif isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
YeahThisIsMe 15 hours ago||
[flagged]
dylan604 13 hours ago|||
Why are you so surprised that the US gov't is being spied on? Of course they are. Why/how could you ever suspect they would not be? How Polyanna can one be to think this way?
senordevnyc 15 hours ago|||
Why would you assume everyone in the world gives a shit about this?
dhosek 13 hours ago||
They’re too polite to say it explicitly, but when they say:

> Most of the activity happens in the evening, Eastern time: about half of it falls between 5 p.m. and midnight, and almost none happens in the early morning. That pattern suggests a person rather than a public guest Wi-Fi network: someone regularly on the White House network late into the evening, whose device is infected with a proxy SDK. Our data shows the exits, not the device or the person behind them.

There really aren’t very many candidates for who that person might be and it really seems like it would be someone who, I don’t know, maybe lives where the traffic is originating.

dpark 13 hours ago||
A lot of people work at the White House. Many of them doubtless work a night shift. The set of candidates here is actually quite large.
mrandish 12 hours ago|||
> A lot of people work at the White House.

I'm no expert but even I've read that "Works at the White House" is bigger than the executive residence and oval office, including the West Wing and the big office building that's directly connected to it by basement walkways. The National Security Council maintains 24-hour watch operations in the Situation Room (which is more a 'complex' than 'room'), while regional desk officers routinely work late evenings to overlap with morning business hours in Europe and Asia.

I asked Gemini if my recollection was correct and got: "The EOP network (managed by the EOP Office of Administration in coordination with Presidential Information Technology Community entities like the White House Communications Agency) operates as a single campus enterprise network. Its high-speed backbone links the West Wing, the EEOB, the East Wing, and nearby administrative facilities such as the New Executive Office Building (NEOB) on 17th Street."

So, definitely an issue that there's a device with some rogue malware installed but the total workforce across all shifts at the White House Complex is roughly between 2,500 and 4,000.

HaZeust 10 hours ago||
"and the big office building that's directly connected to it by basement walkways"

I ask in good faith, but why didn't you just say the Treasury Building?

praxulus 10 hours ago|||
Most people don't know that the Treasury Building is a big office building directly connected to the White House by basement walkways.
Wistar 7 hours ago|||
I didn’t.
HaZeust 9 hours ago|||
Fair point!
sailfast 1 hour ago||||
Because it's not the treasury building lol. There are multiple buildings near the White House that are under this umbrella, and I wouldn't think Treasury is one of them since they need their own office space.
KptMarchewa 3 hours ago||||
Because it's about Eisenhower Executive Office Building
14u2c 6 hours ago|||
Why is this omission of any note? I know the building and I can tell you that it is not particularly remarkable.
devindotcom 13 hours ago||||
the show that came out recently, The Residence, while obviously fiction, made me think about the white house as a semi-public event venue in near constant use by dozens if not hundreds of people. It made for an interesting setting for a whodunit.
CGMthrowaway 12 hours ago||
Of course it is. It's "The People's House." Look up the Great Cheese Levy of 1837, Lincoln's Office Hours, Coolidge's reception on New Years 1927 or Jackie Kennedy literally giving an "MTV Cribs" on TV in 1962. Or consider, if you can remember, the outcry when they permanently closed Pennslvania Avenue in 1995. Or when they closed Lafayette Square in 2020.
ethbr1 17 minutes ago|||
It's amazing thinking about Teddy Roosevelt following the New Year's Day tradition of shaking every single person's hand who showed up at the White House.

Which in the 1907 case meant 8,513 people's hands.

samudrijan 12 hours ago|||
There used to be around the clock anti-nuclear vigils in Peace Park, with soup kitchens feeding folks who lived at their signs.
OtherShrezzing 2 hours ago||||
I can't imagine you'd need very many days of traffic to narrow it down to a very small group of people though. If a device is coming into and out of the campus, that should be fairly easy to reconcile with visitor records. Given that this is one of the most secure locations in the world, I'm reasonably sure a comprehensive list of "who is and isn't on campus" at any given time is available.
maccard 37 minutes ago||
My prosumer ubiquiti gear will give me the MAC address and AP that the device is connected to, along with signal strength. WiFiman and a 5 minute walk will give me the mapping of where had that signal strength from that AP and at that point I could find the device with a physical search. There is no way that this device can’t be found in a few hours by anyone who is even vaguely paying attention.
rob74 3 hours ago||||
Even if many sometimes work at night, you would expect them to also regularly work in the morning, which isn't the case here? So the fact that almost none of the traffic is in the early morning is a further clue pointing to a certain resident whose office hours start around 11 AM...
wtch98 2 hours ago||
Cleaner that comes in after normal office hours, with a phone which connects to guest wifi, which is segregated on the LAN side, but has public IPs from the Whitehouse AS
eloisius 12 hours ago||||
But if you’re the cleaning staff at the White House do you just get on the WiFi?
nomel 11 hours ago|||
Do you believe the availability of wifi for staff/guests is somehow unreasonable? Or, is there a belief that no internet (wifi or cellular) connected devices are allowed on premises? Is them using cellular data, rather than a guest network, somehow more secure?
RobotToaster 7 hours ago|||
I'd hope the guest network is completly separate.
rightnutwingjob 6 hours ago|||
I don’t understand. Is it not?
nomel 6 hours ago||
Maybe I'm confused.

Guest networks are configured to disallow intranet connectivity, so the "security" risk would be from the device having access to the internet, on a guest network IP. But a guest network exists for the purpose of giving untrusted devices access to the internet, without compromising the security of the intranet. My local library, the local airport, Home Depot, the movie theater, etc all have public wifi, yet nobody would claim they were directly compromised. I understand the connection could be used for receiving and sending packets over the internet, like a DDoS (which would trigger rate limits, even at Home Depot), but framing a guest network, giving an untrusted device access to the internet, as some security issue seems very odd. The isolation is the mitigation.

asdff 3 hours ago||
The difference is the home depot does not have spies applying for custodial roles. I’d expect nonessential staff to put their phone in a box at the security check. We also live in a world where israel can remotely explode telecom devices they rig in supply chain intercepts.
dpark 12 hours ago|||
[flagged]
nxobject 11 hours ago|||
Well, there's certainly still a DOGE Starlink terminal up on the roof. (The one they didn't demolish.)
mbreese 10 hours ago||
Even if it was active, that wouldn’t be part of this network, would it?
viraptor 10 hours ago|||
You can see lots at wigle.net But it's a noise of quite a few meme submissions and lots of useless HP OfficeJet and DIRECTV entries...
cozzyd 11 hours ago||||
it is easy to correlate with known public travel...
deskamess 13 hours ago||||
But countable.
__MatrixMan__ 12 hours ago||||
Not if you exclude the ones who behave as if the rules apply to them.
typeofhuman 12 hours ago||
[flagged]
lostlogin 8 hours ago|||
Cocaine in the White House would be be of the least concerning things that’s ever happened there in my view.
rafram 8 hours ago||||
In the cubbies at the visitors’ entrance, yes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_White_House_cocaine_incid...

Libcat99 8 hours ago||||
Found in storage cubby #50, an area where tour groups and visitors leave phones and personal belongings before entering secure or guided spaces.

This almost certainly had nothing to do with the administration. A single search would show that, for those interested in taking that time.

dpark 7 hours ago||||
This is why politicians keep repeating the same lies. Said often enough, people believe them.

Some visitor forgot their nearly empty baggie of coke and conservatives convinced you Hunter Biden was doing blow with Joe in the Oval Office.

rightnutwingjob 6 hours ago||
Likewise, if the nearly empty bag of cocaine was found* while Musk & Trump were working together, Progressive Liberals would be calling for their execution.

I mean, the nearly empty bag of cocaine isn’t necessary, Progressive Liberals do call* for their execution.

throwaway-blaze 11 hours ago|||
[flagged]
BLKNSLVR 11 hours ago|||
I like to be unipartisan (or is it panpartisan?), all politicians do bad things.
saaaaaam 7 hours ago||
Non partisan
dpark 7 hours ago|||
This fake martyrdom is so tiresome. “No one lets us talk bad about Biden/Pelosi/Newsome/Whoever. You can only say bad stuff about Trump!”

Boo hoo. No one’s stopping you. No one’s cancelling you. If you have something you say, then say it. Otherwise stop crying fake tears about the mean liberals who are somehow censoring you.

But if it want to talk about the baggie of coke, maybe do any research at all instead of listening to lying politicians who claimed it belonged to Hunter Biden with zero evidence (and zero logic).

wtch98 2 hours ago||||
Most people working shifts will work varied shifts, sometimes nights, sometimes days, sometimes they'll be missing for days or weeks on end
therein 13 hours ago||||
Could even be cleaning or security.
dpark 13 hours ago||
As someone elsewhere in the thread noted, this could well be the press. Could also be that this isn’t the White House network at all despite that attribution.
xp84 13 hours ago|||
Right, we know the White House owns that public IP, but this could be as bad as an unsecured, unmanaged device that is joined to a private network that is supposed to be secured, OR, on the “all the way good” side, that IP could be the exit for a completely throwaway, untrusted, isolated LAN segment meant only for some iOT device and which has no route to any other peer on the LAN side, and some civilian who has access to that for work brought in his laptop with a “free VPN!” Plugin and joined it to that network because it’s all he had credentials for.
duskwuff 7 hours ago|||
One would expect network activity related to the press to be concentrated during daytime hours, not between 5 PM and midnight.
EA-3167 11 hours ago|||
If it keeps happening I think that at least suggests the source is someone or some people who are “above the rules” most people would be bound by. You can tell the cleaning crew to get off the damned WiFi, others not so much.
ajcp 12 hours ago|||
Even at midnight I can't imagine there being less than 100 people working at the WH in various capacities. While it's probably not the duty/desk officers in the Situation Room/Security Council, there are plenty of maintenance staff that work at night. 5-midnight seems like it overlaps perfectly with a shift schedule.
jeremyjh 12 hours ago||
But how many of them would risk their job by smuggling in a device that violates government policies? Every device in the White House should be accounted for and meeting a number of security criteria. There are really only two or three people there who would know that those rules don't apply to them.
jp_sc 12 hours ago|||
They are not saying that is _on purpose_, in fact they are saying the opposite: a compromised device, could be even an Android phone. It could also be as device planted on purpose, of course.
asdff 3 hours ago||
Given that, why are there so many loose phones at all? Here is one compromised that we know about, in the biggest target for espionage on planet earth.
tclancy 12 hours ago||||
You’re misreading what this says. It’s someone bringing in a device they managed to get infected.

Oh and also the part where no one has caught this internally which is possibly the bigger takeaway. It’s a zero-trust network made out of incompetence.

esikich 8 hours ago||
There's nothing in the article that suggests it's not just the guest wifi. Which wouldn't be monitored. Why would you? The whole point is that it's segmented and can't actually interact with anything important.
skipkey 11 hours ago||||
Eh, I would not be surprised if they have a separate wifi that guests can use and you can hook up your private devices to. Basically every large company i have worked for, for the last two decades had that. I suspect deep in the bowels of the White House you don’t get good reception.
what 12 hours ago|||
Why are you assuming the person knows and is actively smuggling in the device? And why would you then assume that person is more significant than a shift worker there?
asdff 3 hours ago||
Probably because hegseth decided to actively use signal to discuss military planning instead of secure channels that don’t invite such screwups like adding random citizens to these discussions.
3RTB297 8 hours ago|||
The White House doesn't shut down at 5pm. There's whole books, TV series, and movies about the people that are working late every night at the White House. Likely dozens of people are on staff and work shifts that last until midnight every night of the week.

Service staff, including the storied hundred or so White House butlers, work whatever hours are needed. Then you have Secret Service, Kitchen staff, Natalie, house admin staff like the Chief Usher, maybe even NPS staff as the WH grounds are a national park as well, any of whom I would assume might be given access to the secure but unclassified WH wifi and likely a government-issued device. One device with a proxy among all of those people? Entirely unsurprising.

Maybe it's just the printer that Natalie carries around in her purse.

mikeweiss 10 hours ago|||
Actually sound like the opposite of someone who lives there...Sounds like a shift worker.
TheDong 7 hours ago|||
That timing could also align with a device that is turned on and off at specific times, for example an insecure smart TV that is generally turned on to watch TV in the evening, and turned off around midnight.

Though the fact that it lines up with an 8 hour shift also makes it seem human-like, so I think I'd rank a human carrying an infected device as more likely than an infected periodically-active device.

gcollard- 13 hours ago|||
Or the cleaning or security staff working the night shift.
ggm 11 hours ago|||
If you regard 1,000 or less people as few, then this is true. If you regard 1,000 people as "too many" then you rate the national security of the USA at the cost of 1 in 1000 means it's not worth bothing to find out.

Is that really how national security works?

nomel 10 hours ago||
What makes you believe this is related to national security?
ggm 9 hours ago||
[dead]
what 12 hours ago|||
There’s a ton of people it could be. Any staffer that works 5-12, which wouldn’t be a particularly weird shift for cooks, cleaners, etc that bring their infected phone with them.

If it was someone who lived there it wouldn’t be exclusively that time period. Why wouldn’t it happen overnight or in the morning or any other time of day?

dofm 9 hours ago|||
Unless it is running on a government issued iPhone, it is not the Individual #1 you are alluding to.

He very famously does not know how to use computers and can only basically manage tweeting from his phone, which he is mostly not, actually, doing himself.

Now, there are two or three terminally online people around him. I would be more quick to point the finger at his foul-mouthed spokesman but it’s admittedly because I hate that guy and he seems rather stupid. But perhaps it could be the devoted portable printer lady, or the overpromoted unblinking former golf caddy guy.

All of them are around to help with the, er, modern day presidential communications.

lostlogin 8 hours ago|||
> He very famously does not know how to use computers and can only basically manage tweeting from his phone, which he is mostly not, actually, doing himself.

Despite the constant negative press covfefe

dofm 8 hours ago||
Most of it is Harp or Scavino, as far as I have read.
duskwuff 7 hours ago|||
[dead]
redwood 1 hour ago|||
Does it continue when the prez is in Florida? Seems a good test on the hypo
shrubble 11 hours ago|||
There’s at least 500 people on just the staff of the White House, not including many others who work nearby.
abofh 11 hours ago||
With the authority to walk in with a streaming stick, plug it into a TV and connect to WiFi!
avodonosov 8 hours ago|||
Do you imply this residential proxy is also a Presidential proxy?
jachee 7 hours ago|||
It’s probably Natalie.
poopiokaka 12 hours ago|||
[dead]
aaron695 7 hours ago|||
[dead]
lakeviewterrace 12 hours ago|||
[flagged]
what 12 hours ago||
[flagged]
lakeviewterrace 11 hours ago||
With all the recent changes, they are actually encouraging each other to migrate here — I've seen the comments. It's no longer a myth.
RockRobotRock 12 hours ago||
Yeah dude you’re right Trump bought an android tv from banggood and got pwned. You’re a genius.
buildsjets 11 hours ago||
He never buys what he can grift for free. Probably a gift from some autocrat in exchange for politcal favors. Much like the Great Seal bug.
pjc50 3 hours ago||
He got gifted an entire jet!
iandanforth 51 minutes ago||
This article seems to cast residential proxies in a wholly negative light. In fact the company is openly antagonistic to anonymity. I find that perspective diminishes my trust in the rest of their claims.
jappgar 46 minutes ago||
No one would agree to host a residential proxy if they knew what they were signing up for.

The whole industry is dirty.

dgellow 38 minutes ago||
Residential proxy is the industry euphemism. In most cases they aren’t set up willingly. Access is sold to various bad actors, for data collection, botnets, or for a clean residential exit IP
janoelze 1 hour ago||
How did nobody make a (p)residential proxy joke yet?
lakeviewterrace 15 hours ago||
So they don't actually know what this network is, just who owns the IP space... time for a blog post to advertise our week-old service!

There is no evidence that physically ties this to the WH. It could be in a security lab for all they know. Or a guest network for the news media.

Terr_ 14 hours ago||
> There is no evidence that physically ties this to the WH.

They don't need to be physically inside a specific building to be a networking security problem.

The core issue is whether an outsider has bypassed your firewall and can send+receive traffic from a node which is getting more trust than it deserves. If they've compromised the computer's microphone/camera/wifi-control that's an additional problem.

lakeviewterrace 13 hours ago||
[flagged]
itishappy 12 hours ago|||
"We don't know where the devices that appear to have breached the WH network are located. For all we know, they could be in Beijing or Moscow."

That seems significantly worse.

nexus6 2 hours ago|||
Is it some like like NordVPN? It has an option to act as a residential proxy (useful to evade VPN IP blocks)
1e1a 15 hours ago||
Perhaps ping time measurements could help identify where the devices are physically located.
0cf8612b2e1e 13 hours ago||
If you were really sneaky, could you add some small jitter to the network responses to make it more difficult to locate?
adyavanapalli 9 hours ago|||
You can only _add_ jitter. So presumably you make people think you're farther away than you really are. I guess if you're especially clever, you can manufacture responses to packets you haven't sent yet to throw people off.
fn-mote 10 hours ago||||
Jitter is not a defense against statistical analysis. Additional lag might be what you want.
1e1a 8 hours ago||
Additional constant delay? Isn't that also easily defeated when you're measuring from multiple nodes?
Hnrobert42 2 hours ago||||
Or just block inbound ICMP.
cowlevel 12 hours ago|||
No. You would need to add hundreds of milliseconds depending on the sender's location.
bronco21016 16 hours ago||
Gotta have your SuperBox set up to watch 24 hr cable news working late into the night.
Tangurena2 14 hours ago||
For those who don't know what this is, here's a decent podcast about it:

https://darknetdiaries.com/episode/172/

There's a transcript if you want to read, not listen. At the start, you'll be "hey! I gotta get me one!" and later you'll be like "burn it with fire!"

yard2010 4 hours ago|||
> I get a hit in my vulnerability log, like in the threat log on my Palo Alto firewall, and it’s for a SCADA vulnerability. ... A SCADA vulnerability. This makes no sense. SCADA is the control systems used in large-scale industrial settings. Think pumps, valves, conveyor belts, compressors, elevators, railway switches. This is where SCADA systems live. Why in the world is this box that’s here to deliver TV and movies attempting to trigger a SCADA exploit on D3ada55’ network? This is very concerning.

Such things are threats to humanity imho. They can get us back to the times we couldn't exploit the internet to run a society.

mryijum 12 hours ago|||
Interesting! According to this, a lot more going on beyond the residential proxy element, which was the only bit I had considered (or heard about). I wish there was an accompanying article with some more specifics.
thenthenthen 11 hours ago||
I aso would like a technical deepdive, the transcript comes out as not very well informed and borderline conspiratorial.

“ Most of the infected devices were manufactured in China. ” uh… most devices are manufactured in China period. Very strange article/podcast.

JTbane 15 hours ago|||
I have seen these at mall kiosks advertising "free cable", and today I learned they are proxying from your home network.
cowlevel 12 hours ago|||
That is the least bad thing they could do btw. Unless your internet is data restricted, go for it if you want free cable. If questioned by your ISP (extremely unlikely but theoretically possible) pretend you have no idea what they're talking about.

Firewall it from your local network if you want to - it'll still work - they're not after that.

drnick1 12 hours ago|||
Absolutely, and this is why I refuse to run connected devices on my network that do run software I can reasonably trust. This is also why every computer, phone or appliance I own runs Linux. This includes my TV box, which I recently migrated to an x86 port of Android with Claude's help.
thehodge 16 hours ago|||
That was the first thing I thought of!
ethagnawl 14 hours ago||
A friend in Texas claims they recently bought one at Wal-Mart. I don't know anything about how these work but that can't be true ... right?
Good4boothee 3 hours ago|||
There are plenty of people selling IPTV access on g2g, few bucks for a month, all TV channels from entire world. I am not sure if it is profitable to let such piracy boxes work forever, even with them being used as residential proxy, but I also don't know how low you can go if you skip middlemen.
mplewis 13 hours ago|||
It's absolutely true, these are sold all over the place
amai 31 minutes ago||
So somebody likes to appear as if he/she works from the white house, but actually isn‘t there? Why not use a VPN for that?
hackernud3s 15 hours ago||
Those are better than residential proxies. Those are White House proxies. I would pay $10/GB for those babies.
BLKNSLVR 14 hours ago||
Those proxies are paid for in rubles, not dollars.
9dev 12 hours ago|||
They are (p)residential proxies really
mrefish 14 hours ago||
Executive residential proxies
seethishat 14 hours ago||
I have T-mobile 5g. My IP shows up as a residential proxy. I can't control the T-Mobile 5g device. It's a black-box. And, I only have one Linux desktop on the home network (so no Windows/Mac malware).

Not sure why my IP is listed as a residential proxy.

hetspookjee 14 hours ago||
There’s only that many ipv4 addresses and I believe all 5G are shared ones. That’s why they’re among the most valuable ip ranges for scraping. You can’t just naively ban that IP or you’ll ban a large group of users
BLKNSLVR 14 hours ago|||
You certainly can ban that IP.

It should be a balancing act though, somewhere between what you said and my first sentence.

Rate limiting, or additional layers of input sanitisation for IP addresses known to have been malicious in the past.

It's unfortunate that good users will have to endure some difficulties because of bad users on the same network, but if security is the priority, then measures must be taken, you shouldn't just leave to door open to potentially known bad users / traffic.

IPv4 is a shared resource, but some ranges have worse reputations than others, and all are owned by organisations that have the ability to monitor and filter for malicious traffic. It gets into a fraught discussion about censorship, but it is possible for network owners to monitor for, and block / restrict traffic detected as 'bad'. It's just a matter of cost and scale, and those that put the effort in should have their users rewarded with fewer 'trust-issues' roadblocks.

skinfaxi 9 hours ago|||
> It's unfortunate that good users will have to endure some difficulties because of bad users on the same network, but if security is the priority, then measures must be taken, you shouldn't just leave to door open to potentially known bad users / traffic

Is this like a corporate support response? I legit can't tell. Try explaining to a retail consumer why they can't buy from your site because they have TMobile service.

what 9 hours ago||
They’re saying T-Mobile should be monitoring traffic on their network and block traffic from bad actors that ruin it for everyone for everyone else? Or at least they do in the next paragraph.
skinfaxi 8 hours ago||
When the bad actor is grandma who has an infected computer, T-Mobile will be dealing with a lot of support calls from objectively non-malicious actors.
neuroticnews25 4 hours ago||||
>you shouldn't just leave to door open to potentially known bad users / traffic

Why not? If security is the priority, the worst that could happen from that is clutter in logs and higher resource use. Nobody wastes 0days spraying them on random hosts, and a real motivated attacker targeting your server will not be stopped by an ip blacklist.

Gigachad 10 hours ago|||
The blocking of residential proxies might be the thing that moves the world to ipv6. These days what we need is a dynamic map of all the IPs running proxies so servers can block them. If every device gets it's own v6 address, you could block just the TV running the proxy. Modern crowd sourced security products could identify the proxies and share their IP live so you can ban and unban addresses as the device moves.
BLKNSLVR 4 hours ago|||
A list of proxy lists: https://proxy-scraper.de/sources/

The lists generated by this tool can be useful as well: https://github.com/maximilianfeix/proxy-scraper (which point to here: https://github.com/maximilianfeix/free-proxy-list)

There is also this bot proxy IP list: https://github.com/antoinevastel/avastel-bot-ips-lists

1e1a 5 hours ago||||
The TV can just pick a different address when it notices that it is being blocked.
Gigachad 4 hours ago||
In that case you’d just block the whole subnet that the TV is using.
sva_ 14 hours ago|||
Not sure about US but where I live I can manually set the access point of my phones mobile network and it gives me a unique ipv4 (new one each time in fact)
hod6654 6 hours ago||
Care to elaborate? Your mobile network operator gives you a long list of APNs that you can use?
ofcrpls 14 hours ago|||
You might just be experiencing T-Mobile's CGNAT on mobile broadband?
walrus01 14 hours ago|||
You're almost certainly behind a cgnat shared with a bunch of compromised/residential proxy running phones and other traffic.
cowlevel 12 hours ago||
Or ones who are running it knowingly to make money. Can that even be called a compromise?
cannonpalms 13 hours ago|||
T-Mobile esp. their 5G network is behind CGNAT
stcg 4 hours ago|
"Residential proxies" are just botnets: it's mass-spread software under direct central control without the knowledge of the owners of the machines.
port11 4 hours ago|
Thanks for clarifying the language. I don’t understand why we softened ‘botnet’, it’s much clearer and powerful.
cryptonym 4 hours ago|||
You resell a game, bundling a botnet proxy inside, and make it freemium: free if you accept T&C with a service allowing using your device connection for research purposes (or whatever wording could be even more confusing), or pay $20.

It's no longer a botnet, it's a "residential proxy" and you are doing clean business.

BLKNSLVR 1 hour ago|||
In my head this is Joe Pesci saying "the money is now laundered" in Lethal Weapon 2.
port11 4 hours ago|||
I didn’t know this was a thing. Yikes. I’m gonna freak out now and find a way to prevent that in our home network.

And I’d argue that’s not clean business, the user doesn’t know what their connection is being used for :)

cryptonym 4 hours ago||
"User accepted T&C" is enough to get away with almost anything. It works very well for top IT companies. Upholding new business to higher standards would be unfair.
oefrha 3 hours ago|||
Trillion dollar AI companies use/used these to scrape the Internet. You don’t want to smear their good names do you?
More comments...