[At least] TWC has a vast mishmash of vendors and models and device types, depending on what they were bidding for and when, and how much outdated CPE they've been able to or even attempted to reclaim / replace. I would hesitate to endorse a blanket statement that they don't do this any more.
This is extremely common practice (malpractice?): add Cox to the list of current RFC1918 leakers. On 2013-05-17 15:20:12 (-0400), Joshua Zukerman wrote: Time Warner Cable (roadrunner) used to have this problem. They used the 10.x.x.x in various subnet masks for backend management IP addresses on all of their customer cable modems, plus whatever other network equipment they had. 2600 mag had an article a few years ago discussing this very issue. I assume RCN is also a cable internet provider, so my guess is your issue is one in the same. I can safely report that TWC is now filtering out those from the ethernet side of the cable modem (has been for about a year or so), so I cannot see any other 10.x.x.x networks outside of my own. Probably done via the cable modem config & ACLs. On Fri, May 17, 2013 at 3:08 PM, kyle kemmerer <[1]krkemme...@gmail.com> wrote: So today when trying to access a device on my network (172.30.x.x range) I was taken to the web interface of a completely different device. This baffled me at first, but after a bit of poking around, I determined that my ISP was actually routing traffic to these addresses. See the trace below Tracing route to 172.30.4.18 over a maximum of 30 hops 1 11 ms 18 ms 19 ms XXXXXXXXX 2 30 ms 178 ms 212 ms [2]vl4.aggr1.phdl.pa.rcn.net [208.59.252.1] 3 13 ms 18 ms 13 ms [3]tge0-1-0-0.core1.phdl.pa.rcn.net [207.172.15.50] 4 37 ms 39 ms 57 ms [4]tge0-0-0-2.core1.lnh.md.rcn.net [207.172.19.227] 5 35 ms 34 ms 32 ms [5]tge0-1-0-1.core1.chgo.il.rcn.net [207.172.19.235 ] 6 42 ms 38 ms 39 ms [6]port-chan13.aggr2.chgo.il.rcn.net [207.172.15.20 1] 7 37 ms 39 ms 39 ms [7]port-chan1.mart-ubr1.chi-mart.il.cable.rcn.net [ 207.229.191.132] 8 57 ms 61 ms 53 ms 172.30.4.18 Trace complete. So I break out nmap and do a quick scan, and find that there are thousands of these devices across this IP range. Has anybody ever seen anything like this? Surely this must be a mistake, right? If anybody else is using RCN as an ISP, can you access these addresses as well? References 1. mailto:krkemme...@gmail.com 2. http://vl4.aggr1.phdl.pa.rcn.net/ 3. http://tge0-1-0-0.core1.phdl.pa.rcn.net/ 4. http://tge0-0-0-2.core1.lnh.md.rcn.net/ 5. http://tge0-1-0-1.core1.chgo.il.rcn.net/ 6. http://port-chan13.aggr2.chgo.il.rcn.net/ 7. http://port-chan1.mart-ubr1.chi-mart.il.cable.rcn.net/
_______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/