Re: Have you ever disabled IPv6 for privacy (to prevent IP leaks)?

On 20/07/2026 06:57, Maria Sophia wrote:
> Holy shit!. This is profound... topology determines privacy!
> 
> Chrome, Firefox, Edge, whatever...  all are IPv6-first nowadays.
> Yet those browsers can only leak IPv6 if the client has a global IPv6
> address. A bridged router ensures it never does.
> 
> Modern web browsers can directly use our PCs IPv6 address such that
>   a. A PC web browser using its own Wi-Fi NIC can leak IPv6, but...
>   b. A PC web browser using a router-as-Wi-Fi bridge cannot leak IPv6!
> 
> Jesus Christ. This is really big in terms of instant IPV6 privacy!
> The IPV6 privacy comes from architecture, not configuration.
> 
> I only just now realized this stupendous revelation after digging through
> the wreckage, that if we simply pair our PC RJ45 with a router acting as a
> wireless bridge (instead of using the internal wi-fi card), I think we may
> instantly solve the IPV6 privacy problem without the complexity of 0x20
> DisabledComponents.
> 
> By using RJ45 for Wi-Fi, the PC no longer has a Wi-Fi IPv6 stack to leak!
> 
> The PC web browser cannot leak IPv6 because the browser cannot see IPv6.
> It sees only IPv4, Ethernet and fe80:: (local-only, which is unusable).
> 
>      *There is nothing for the PC web browser to leak*	.
> 
> Even taking the specific case of torrrenting over VPN leaking an IPv6
> address, the leak happens when the PC has a global IPv6 address coupled
> with a free VPN that does not tunnel IPv6, tied to a torrent client that
> uses IPv6 anyway.
> 
> In that scenario, the real IPv6 address escapes outside the VPN tunnel.
> The *source* of those leaks, interestingly, is the internal Wi-Fi NIC.
> 
> Wi-Fi interfaces in Windows automatically generate:
>   a. global IPv6 addresses
>   b. temporary IPv6 privacy addresses
>   c. IPv6 DNS queries
>   d. IPv6 fallback routes
>   e. IPv6 autoconfiguration
>   f. IPv6 neighbor discovery
>   g. IPv6 tunnels (Teredo, ISATAP, 6to4)
> Such that, even if we think we're not using IPv6, Windows is.
> 
> With an Ethernet-connected-router acting as a wireless bridge, the PC
> thinks it's using Ethernet only, and Ethernet IPv6 is:
>   a. link-local only (fe80::)
>   b. not routable
>   c. not global
>   d. not visible outside our LAN
>   e. not used by VPNs
>   f. not used by torrent clients
>   g. not used by browsers
> Hence, as far as I know, a link-local IPv6 address cannot leak.
> 
> And, in my case, the circa 2007 DD-WRT router (WNR834Bv2) is too old to
> support real IPv6 so it is physically incapable of participating in IPv6.
> 
> No global IPv6 on the client means no IPv6 leak.
> A bridge guarantees exactly that.
> 
> What's philosophically brilliant is that even with a fully intact IPv6
> stack, and even with a modern router acting as a wireless bridge, the same
> privacy advantage still holds.
A Wi-Fi bridge???
This isn't one of that idiot Rob Braxman's brain farts is it?

If you don't have a global IPv6 YOU ARE NOT USING IPv6 TO ACCESS THE 
INTERNET. You have disabled IPv6.
THERE IS NO BRIDGE - whatever you think that is!?

-- 
Brian Gregory (in England).