static or dynamic IP?

I have option of a static IP when I sign up for broadband, should I take
one, I've no idea what the advantage of having one is so should I just not
worry about it? TIA

On Mon, 8 Nov 2004 16:16:15 +0000 (UTC), "Rob" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I have option of a static IP when I sign up for broadband, should I take
>one, I've no idea what the advantage of having one is so should I just not
>worry about it? TIA

If it is a no-cost option I would opt for it. Could be useful for
access into your system from the net later.

--
Hiram Hackenbacker

On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 16:16:15 +0000, Rob wrote:

> I have option of a static IP when I sign up for broadband, should I take
> one, I've no idea what the advantage of having one is so should I just not
> worry about it? TIA

as someone else said, if it doesn't cost extra, take it.

the difference between a "static" and a "dynamically assigned" ip address
is that with the static one, your ip address is always the same, whereas
more commonly ip addresses are dynamically assigned, which means the
address changes every time you connect (or every time the connection
drops out and comes back).

for most domestic users, this isn't an issue, but if you want to log onto
your home computer from another machine on the internet, it's very handy
to have a static address.

it also means you could run a web server, etc.

will

"will kemp" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news(E-Mail Removed) et...
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 16:16:15 +0000, Rob wrote:
>
>> I have option of a static IP when I sign up for broadband, should I
>> take
>> one, I've no idea what the advantage of having one is so should I just
>> not
>> worry about it? TIA
>
> as someone else said, if it doesn't cost extra, take it.
>
> the difference between a "static" and a "dynamically assigned" ip
> address
> is that with the static one, your ip address is always the same, whereas
> more commonly ip addresses are dynamically assigned, which means the
> address changes every time you connect (or every time the connection
> drops out and comes back).
>
> for most domestic users, this isn't an issue, but if you want to log
> onto
> your home computer from another machine on the internet, it's very handy
> to have a static address.
>
> it also means you could run a web server, etc.

It also means nefarious types are more likely to spot your system and do
all sorts of damage if you don't run a properly configured firewall..!

Ivor

will kemp wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Nov 2004 16:16:15 +0000, Rob wrote:
>
>
>>I have option of a static IP when I sign up for broadband, should I take
>>one, I've no idea what the advantage of having one is so should I just not
>>worry about it? TIA
>
>
> as someone else said, if it doesn't cost extra, take it.
>
> the difference between a "static" and a "dynamically assigned" ip address
> is that with the static one, your ip address is always the same, whereas
> more commonly ip addresses are dynamically assigned, which means the
> address changes every time you connect (or every time the connection
> drops out and comes back).
>
> for most domestic users, this isn't an issue, but if you want to log onto
> your home computer from another machine on the internet, it's very handy
> to have a static address.
>
> it also means you could run a web server, etc.
>
> will
>
Is there not a bigger security risk with a static ip address? I'm not
really a techie guy on all this, but many of the ISP advise having a
dynamic ip address since, because it always changes, your PC is less
prone to attack. But then, maybe they have their own reasons for saying
so? What is the real answer?

Ed

Ed wrote:
> Is there not a bigger security risk with a static ip address? I'm not
> really a techie guy on all this, but many of the ISP advise having a
> dynamic ip address since, because it always changes, your PC is less
> prone to attack. But then, maybe they have their own reasons for
> saying so? What is the real answer?
>
> Ed


If you run a system that is vulnerable to outside threats, it makes no
difference if you are on a static or dynamic IP address.
If you run a system that is not vulnerable to these probes by these "script
kiddies" then it also makes no difference as to how you get your IP
assigned.
99% of probes from over the net come from people who scan the range of IP's
held by an ISP.
This means that you will get probed no matter how your IP is assigned.

The only people/system admins that "really" need to worry are the ones that
are in charge of networks at large well known facilities, as it is these
systems that attract the most attention from people with some degree of
knowledge on system security or the lack of it!

On 9 Nov 2004 "Ade65" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>If you run a system that is vulnerable to outside threats, it makes
>no difference if you are on a static or dynamic IP address.

That's only one form of attack - sometimes someone finds they have just
annoyed someone else, and the 'else' takes to getting spam etc sent to
them (perhaps by getting a domain name from their IP if it is fixed,
though it depends on the ISP too, of course)... There's also ways to
'block access' to a service or host from a specific IP (or to handle a
request in a different way depending on IP, so as to serve up different
pages, if necessary). You could be blocked from using a forum, IRC, or
similar, if you have peeved one of the moderators... maybe they could
justify blocking one IP to their peers, but a whole ISP dynamic range?

I find it handy to look at competitors' web sites using a dynamic IP,
and work for some of my clients on the basis that whatever the logging
some competitor of theirs has, there is no simple track back to them...
How many logfiles show a (sub-)domain which gives away the business
who was browsing your web site... plenty, I suspect :-) Peter M.

--
PlusNet <http://tinyurl.com/24ymz> - I recommend them and save some cash.
Depends on account that is opened by new customer, but good value ISP IMO.

>>> I have option of a static IP when I sign up for broadband, should I
>>> take
>>> one, I've no idea what the advantage of having one is [...]

Ivor Jones <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> It also means nefarious types are more likely to spot your system

Two thoughts opposing this...

* Script kiddies scan entire dynamic address space blocks, so it
doesn't matter which IP address your machine has been given
because it will be found anyway

* Dynamic addresses appear not to change very often (unless you're
on a "crowed" address block and you've ended up "sharing" an IP
address allocation with someone else). This means they're often
sufficiently close to being static that you'll probably get the
same IP address each time, but you don't have the advantage of
knowing it /will/ be the same each time

> and do
> all sorts of damage if you don't run a properly configured firewall..!

That should be a given, regardless of address allocation. Interestingly,
as a precaution, my ISP automatically blocks access if they detect
any outbound MS-RPC traffic on ports 137-139. I say, "good for them"
(if you /really/ need to use Windows network shares across the Internet
you should be encapsulating them in a VPN).

Chris

poster wrote:
> On 9 Nov 2004 "Ade65" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> If you run a system that is vulnerable to outside threats, it makes
>> no difference if you are on a static or dynamic IP address.
>
> That's only one form of attack - sometimes someone finds they have
> just annoyed someone else, and the 'else' takes to getting spam etc
> sent to them (perhaps by getting a domain name from their IP if it is
> fixed, though it depends on the ISP too, of course)... There's also
> ways to 'block access' to a service or host from a specific IP (or to
> handle a request in a different way depending on IP, so as to serve
> up different pages, if necessary). You could be blocked from using a
> forum, IRC, or similar, if you have peeved one of the moderators...
> maybe they could justify blocking one IP to their peers, but a whole
> ISP dynamic range?
>
> I find it handy to look at competitors' web sites using a dynamic IP,
> and work for some of my clients on the basis that whatever the logging
> some competitor of theirs has, there is no simple track back to
> them... How many logfiles show a (sub-)domain which gives away the
> business who was browsing your web site... plenty, I suspect :-)
> Peter M.


I agree with all that you said but Ed asked "Is there not a bigger security
risk with a static ip address?" and I stand by my answers.
All your points like spam, being blocked by servers and anonymous surfing of
competitors sites have nothing to do with security risks whatsoever!

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004 13:08:43 -0000, "Ade65" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>I agree with all that you said but Ed asked "Is there not a bigger security
>risk with a static ip address?" and I stand by my answers.

I didn't dispute your answers, did I ?

>All your points like spam, being blocked by servers and anonymous surfing of
>competitors sites have nothing to do with security risks whatsoever!

Your post said "vulnerable to attack" and in the greater scheme of things, ie
to give the original poster some other comments for or against static, it was
simply to illustrate why sometimes a fixed IP might not be ideal, over any of
the hacker/DoS reasoning where dynamic might or might not benefit a user. Do
please allow for a thread to move on, not expect it to be tied to some fixed
'respond only in respect of the point(s) raised' OK ? Peter M.