• 👁️👄👁️
    link
    English
    66 months ago

    For the most part yeah, but with limited IPv4, there can be multiple servers that share the same IP separated under a NAT. Definitely don’t assume you’re anonymous though. If it was IPv6 then it’d be 1:1 map to a specific domain.

    • @Dave@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      46 months ago

      If it was IPv6 then it’d be 1:1 map to a specific domain.

      I’m not sure this is (always) true.

      I might rent a VPN, and that VPN may have an IPv6. But I could host a dozen services on it, behind a reverse proxy, and there would still only be one IP.

      • 👁️👄👁️
        link
        English
        36 months ago

        I think you misunderstand. I’m not talking about a single server hosting multiple servers. I’m talking about like your whole neighborhood could share the same ipv4 address by your ISP because of NAT. Proxies have nothing to do with NATs.

        • @4am
          link
          English
          46 months ago

          You should specify that you mean CGNAT, which is different from regular NAT and works at the WAN level.

          Also, your ISP does the routing and translation for CGNAT, so they can still see exactly what everyone is doing (by necessity - they need to route your packets!)

          So this helps even in the case of CGNAT, and they will only know the destination IP of your traffic.

        • @Dave@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          36 months ago

          But in this case, the ISP already knows who you are within the CG-NAT because they run it. I’m confused as to how this is relevant to a comment about servers sharing an IP address.

            • @Dave@lemmy.nz
              link
              fedilink
              56 months ago

              The new protocol discussed in this post is about privacy in transit, not about protecting yourself from the server you are connecting to, so I got very confused.