• Monkios (unregistered)

    Not a comment.

    Seriously, I love the CSI one.

  • Mai-chan (unregistered)
    Comment held for moderation.
  • JDM (unregistered)

    The CSI thing isn't as braindead as it looks ... and I've seen it before in more tech-savvy movies like AntiTrust.

    They use invalid IP addresses because they don't want to direct any viewers to a real address. There's no IP equivalent to the "555" telephone numbers...

  • BlueCollarAstronaut (unregistered)

    Hollywood should apply similar rules to IP addresses that they do with phone numbers (555.555.555.555), so they don't run the risk of copying real IPs...that one is actually pretty close to mine which is 359.33.-10.237

  • Joel (unregistered)

    Ya they know nothing about IP addresses just like those TV writer idiots and their 555 phone numbers that never work!

    At least Jenny was forthcoming with her phone number!

  • old bloke (unregistered)

    I have a photo of a library door labelled "Fire Exit" and "Staff Only".

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to JDM
    JDM:
    The CSI thing isn't as braindead as it looks ... and I've seen it before in more tech-savvy movies like AntiTrust.

    They use invalid IP addresses because they don't want to direct any viewers to a real address. There's no IP equivalent to the "555" telephone numbers...

    Why didn't they just use a private subnet address like (10.33.9.234)?

  • Rookierookie (unregistered)

    I vote for 127.0.0.1

  • Anonymous Howard (unregistered)

    Yeah, the CSI one really isn't a WTF, just the equivalent of a 555 phone number in any other movie or TV show. The others, though, are quite amusing.

  • AppleMunkey (unregistered)

    I wanted to make a clever comment about the CSI one being in base <whatever>, but then I noticed there are nines in it. :-(

  • The Vicar (cs) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    Why didn't they just use a private subnet address like (10.33.9.234)?

    The sort of person who complains when they use an impossible IP address would also complain if they used a private subnet address. Nobody else will even notice.

    As for the "Exit/No Exit" one: those glass, ceiling-mounted "Exit" signs are supposed to designate emergency exits, not ordinary exits. They have battery-backed lights inside, too. It's quite common to find one over a door which is not ordinarily used.

  • anonymous_coder() (unregistered)

    I can't watch that crap - it plays fast and loose with every piece of technology they cover, making forensics look easy and unambiguous.

    A local DA actaully complained about CSI making it harder to get convictions off of forensic evidence, since the jurors have been taught that all crimes are solved in a day or two on CSI - what's wrong with your forensics guys if they can't do the same?

    And that doesn't even go into the image enhancement (let's take a grainy security camera video and make a small portion of it look HD-level perfect), e-mail recovery "because any email you send stays online forever", banking history lookups without warrants, and various stupid UI's that go "bing" when the plot line needs it.

    I've done a couple of forensic investigations for clients, and it's a dull, slow slog through logs and servers, and thousands of dead ends. I didn't get shot at once, or get to drive in a cool new car while I was doing it. And I really wish I could have wrapped it up in an hour, with commercial breaks.

    </rant>
  • AC (unregistered)

    The first one is really great. We should really stop all tis idiocracy-style retards from reproducing. ;)

  • warmachine (cs)

    I vote for 127.0.0.1 as well.

  • Anders (unregistered) in reply to The Vicar
    The Vicar:
    As for the "Exit/No Exit" one: those glass, ceiling-mounted "Exit" signs are supposed to designate emergency exits, not ordinary exits. They have battery-backed lights inside, too. It's quite common to find one over a door which is not ordinarily used.

    I thought they were going for the sign saying 'Exit this floor' (seemingly) pointing at the door.

  • chris (unregistered) in reply to JDM

    "There's no IP equivalent to the "555" telephone numbers..."

    Wrong, RFC 3030, 192.0.2.0/24.

  • Schmitter (unregistered)
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Anonnmouse GuY (unregistered) in reply to chris
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Pap (cs)

    TRWTF is that a regular reader of this website actually was going to get laid. Wowie!

  • jspenguin (cs)

    How about 170.20.0.24? If somebody puts that address in a web browser, they get cbs.com - same thing if you enter "csi miami" in Google and hit "I'm feeling lucky".

  • Spectre (cs) in reply to Mai-chan

    I wonder how does the first picture relate to Information technology? Maybe only to "Curious Perversions"...

    Mai-chan:
    CAPTCHA: RIAA (and I was not even downloading movies)

    That's why it wasn't MPAA.

  • worsethatuseless (cs) in reply to Anon

    IPs in private ranges are actually MORE likely to exits because there are fewer of them and more than one can exist.

    I'd have gone for a joke and used 127.0.0.1

  • caffeinatedbacon (cs) in reply to JDM
    JDM:
    The CSI thing isn't as braindead as it looks ... and I've seen it before in more tech-savvy movies like AntiTrust.

    They use invalid IP addresses because they don't want to direct any viewers to a real address. There's no IP equivalent to the "555" telephone numbers...

    My god I hope my sarcasm-detector is broken. There very much are "555" telephone number IP equivalents on the Internet. For anyone that actually doesn't know, the following are non-routable on the Internet (at least, they shouldn't be routable if your Net provider has properly configured their routers)

    • 10.0.0.0/8
    • 172.16.0.0/12
    • 192.168.0.0/16
    • 240.0.0.0/4 (Class E Reserved range supernet)
    • There are other reserved ranges/numbers that can be used but one from these groups would be the best option.

    For fun, visit http://www.arin.net; their whois will tell you who 'owns' a particular IP/Range. For bedside reading, see http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1918.html for the framework that defines these private 'Internet' ranges.

    /Got suckered in. Networks are my bag, baby

  • vt_mruhlin (cs)

    I love making a comment without reading the whole thread to realize my idea's already been said multiple times.... Look the other way, please.

  • jon787 (cs)

    I've actually been yelled at for using a door like that. It had the glowing exit sign and a handmade sign taped to the door saying it wasn't an exit.

    I told them if they wanted me to stop using it they should make the "do not use" sign more permanent than the "this is an exit" one.

  • Mcoder (cs) in reply to JDM
    JDM:
    They use invalid IP addresses because they don't want to direct any viewers to a *real* address. There's no IP equivalent to the "555" telephone numbers...

    There are plenty of networks that are meant to be used that way. But I also vote for a 127.0.0.0/4 address. Not 127.0.0.1, that is too obvious, some other one, like 127.86.132.4... They could put their entire fictional network into 127.0.0.0.

  • alan (unregistered) in reply to JDM
    JDM:
    They use invalid IP addresses because they don't want to direct any viewers to a *real* address. There's no IP equivalent to the "555" telephone numbers...
    They could use IPs in a private range. Unavailable at the Internet.

    Instead of tracking the bad guys, I think they are playing arcade ;-)

  • Worf (unregistered) in reply to jon787
    jon787:
    I've actually been yelled at for using a door like that. It had the glowing exit sign and a handmade sign taped to the door saying it wasn't an exit.

    I told them if they wanted me to stop using it they should make the "do not use" sign more permanent than the "this is an exit" one.

    Well, this one has them all. The "Exit this floor" sign pointing to the door (or so it seems), the "Not an exit" sign on the door itself, and the emergency exit sign.

    So I can only conclude it's a regular exit ("Exit this floor"), an emergency exit (Exit sign on top), and not an exit ("Not an exit"). Hrm...

  • RMW (unregistered)

    how about "IP address found" and not actually put one up, i mean It can't really be plot crucial can it.

    But you have got to want UI's like that, they just work, are easy to use, have brilliant graphics, and run out of 5yr old white tower block style PC's (OK that's CSI:New york)

  • JokersWild (unregistered) in reply to old bloke

    We have a door at my work labelled "Visitor Center" and "Employees Only"

    In all fairness, it's actually an office for visiting employees from other sites to use, so it actually DOES make sense... but still....

  • henke37 (cs)

    Let's pretend that they are outsourcing the actual work for the machine using a remote client setup.

  • Tachyon (cs) in reply to old bloke

    There is either a brick wall, a void or a very large drop behind that door.

  • S (unregistered) in reply to The Vicar
    As for the "Exit/No Exit" one: those glass, ceiling-mounted "Exit" signs are supposed to designate emergency exits, not ordinary exits. They have battery-backed lights inside, too. It's quite common to find one over a door which is not ordinarily used.

    Writing "Emergency Exit Only!" seems to work fine, carry the same message and not sound quite so silly. (Optionally, "Door is Alarmed!" can be added.)

  • Jon W (unregistered)

    That fake IP is probably to avoid some poor sod being PODed and DDOSed by people with nothing better to do. Just like all TV phone numbers start with "555."

  • Paula (unregistered) in reply to RMW
    RMW:
    have brilliant graphics

    The correct spelling would be "brillant".

  • w00t (unregistered) in reply to caffeinatedbacon
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Toodle (unregistered) in reply to Pap
    Pap:
    TRWTF is that a regular reader of this website actually was going to get laid. Wowie!

    Hahaha! But note that the package remains unwrapped. :p

  • Fernando (unregistered) in reply to anonymous_coder()
    I can't watch that crap - it plays fast and loose with every piece of technology they cover, making forensics look easy and unambiguous.

    A local DA actaully complained about CSI making it harder to get convictions off of forensic evidence, since the jurors have been taught that all crimes are solved in a day or two on CSI - what's wrong with your forensics guys if they can't do the same?

    And that doesn't even go into the image enhancement (let's take a grainy security camera video and make a small portion of it look HD-level perfect), e-mail recovery "because any email you send stays online forever", banking history lookups without warrants, and various stupid UI's that go "bing" when the plot line needs it.

    I've done a couple of forensic investigations for clients, and it's a dull, slow slog through logs and servers, and thousands of dead ends. I didn't get shot at once, or get to drive in a cool new car while I was doing it. And I really wish I could have wrapped it up in an hour, with commercial breaks.

    </rant>

    Well. at least they dont ask you to hack gobernment databases in less than a minute with a gun aiming at your head while some chick you just met plays with your... joystick. Nor... ... ... I have never watched any film with any computer stuff that did look any close to reality.

    Have you ever watched any truly realistic series? I guess you will say the A-Team, but I must tell you, AK-47 (even if modded) don't sound like that.

    Have fun.

  • Dennis (unregistered)

    I think you mean "remains wrapped".

    Is it possible that the panel to the left of the door handle is an access card reader? wtf?

    Note also that one of the signs says "No roof access". There is almost certainly a sign on the other side of the door that says something like "No return access through this door". Not a wtf, though.

  • tin (cs) in reply to Mcoder
    Mcoder:
    But I also vote for a 127.0.0.0/4 address. Not 127.0.0.1, that is too obvious, some other one, like 127.86.132.4... They could put their entire fictional network into 127.0.0.0.

    And there's the winner... You have said exactly what I said when sitting and watching that same episode. 127.0.0.0 range would be perfect.

  • Retard (unregistered)

    IPs, exit doors, CSI... this must be some kind of bad joke. Come on, people! Somebody explain the retard thing! It´s the only sex related thing around here, and you keep talking about everything else but that!

    That´s not sane, you know.

  • waffles (unregistered) in reply to Mai-chan
    Mai-chan:
    In all fairness, "retard" means a "sustained release pill" in the medicine business...
    I didn't know condoms were pills. O_o
  • eth (unregistered) in reply to Fernando
    Fernando:
    Have you ever watched any truly realistic series? I guess you will say the A-Team, but I must tell you, AK-47 (even if modded) don't sound like that.

    Well, perhaps the closes would be when Trinity hacked into the power station. Used a real SSH exploit and all. AND she used NMAP. I thought that was pretty nice.

  • Fernando (unregistered) in reply to eth

    Everybody knows Trinity rocks, period :).

    Now, for real. I was just joking, I bet there are many well documented films and series.

    Have more fun.

  • lorcan (unregistered) in reply to JDM
    JDM:
    The CSI thing isn't as braindead as it looks ... and I've seen it before in more tech-savvy movies like AntiTrust.

    They use invalid IP addresses because they don't want to direct any viewers to a real address. There's no IP equivalent to the "555" telephone numbers...

    What about 192.168.0.1 - or am I missing something? Or maybe it could be 127.0.0.1 - or is that to close to home?

  • E.ab M.b.;.o (unregistered)

    192.168.x.x are assigned by the router. 127.0.0.1 is your computer.

    But you could have an FTP server running on another computer on the network and some lusers might think that you are haxing when using the terminal to access it

  • Xepol (cs)

    The CSI thing is on purpose, like 555- phone numbers, they make sure they never use anything is could actually be real to avoid liability when someone gets a trillion calls (or in this case, a DOS)

    As for that door, it's just your basic stupidity filter. Just add fire & watch it work!

  • Phlip (cs)

    Admit it though... if the plot came up and the computer genius man said "We've traced the connection to somewhere in Nigeria, the IP's 10.5.25.183" you'd still consider it a WTF, since that IP isn't visible to the internet... so you couldn't get a connection from the Internet with that IP.

    The same goes for 192.0.2.0/24 and all the other private/special-use ranges.

    At least the IP in the screenshot isn't private... if it existed, then it'd be public to any computer on the 'net.

    As for the exit/not an exit thing... if you look closely at the signs to the left of the door, you'll see that that door leads to a stairwell which'll let you get to a different floor, but not the outside world ("Exit this floor", "No road access")... which'd be better than nothing if the other alternatives are on fire or something, but wouldn't generally be considered an "exit".

    Mai-chan has already explained the "retard" condom above... so I won't bother repeating that here.

    But hey, don't worry, 0/3 isn't too bad...

  • death (cs) in reply to tin
    tin:
    Mcoder:
    But I also vote for a 127.0.0.0/4 address. Not 127.0.0.1, that is too obvious, some other one, like 127.86.132.4... They could put their entire fictional network into 127.0.0.0.

    And there's the winner... You have said exactly what I said when sitting and watching that same episode. 127.0.0.0 range would be perfect.

    The winner for me too. No unnecessary traffic coming from anywhere without looking obviously fake. As an added bonus: ping 127.86.132.4 PING 127.86.132.4 (127.86.132.4) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from 127.86.132.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.023 ms 64 bytes from 127.86.132.4: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.023 ms 64 bytes from 127.86.132.4: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.034 ms 64 bytes from 127.86.132.4: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.026 ms it responds to ping:P

    When I first saw this on tv and expressed my outrage at the invalidity of the address i got some pretty weird looks from family members around me:P

  • Erik (unregistered)

    The real WTF is that people actually bother watching CSI: Miami.

    And if you want a real laugh fest, try watching Die Hard 4. I thought it was a great action movie, but virtually everything high-tech in it was so utterly wrong I had to keep myself from yelling at the TV every five minutes.

Leave a comment on “Retard Rubber”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article