Thread: A few technical details related the Vatican/Wikipedia/ @TaylorRMarshall scandal.
Whenever you connect to the internet, you connect through a public IP address that any site you visit can see (I’m ignoring VPNs, since the IP in question doesn’t appear to come from a VPN).
Whenever you connect to the internet, you connect through a public IP address that any site you visit can see (I’m ignoring VPNs, since the IP in question doesn’t appear to come from a VPN).
However, multiple people can access the internet through a single public-facing IP address. Usually, a single router with a single public IP gives access to many devices.
For example, if you have multiple devices on your home network, they likely all access the internet using the same IP. Same thing with the Starbucks’ wifi—everyone in the store is likely accessing the internet through a single IP, because they all use the same router.
Internally each device on a network has its own private IP that only someone with access to the router can see. But since that person can see those private addresses, he can track the online activities of any device on the network. But that assumes he is competent and keeps logs.
Another point: the listed “owners” of IP addresses are always organizations (usually large ones) that request blocks of public IP address for the networks they set up in their various offices and locations. Individuals typically don’t own public IP addresses.
The listing for that owner will give a physical address, but that does *not* necessary mean that’s where the computer using that IP is located. For example, P&G might allocate some IP addresses to an office in Cleveland, but the IP will still be listed as Cincinnati-based.
Same thing with the email address listed as the IP address owner. That email is likely just associated with the tech person who originally ordered the block of IP addresses. It doesn’t mean that person is associated with all the activities under the IP address.
Except in cases of internet providers, the vast majority of the time the physical address given for an IP is the same or very close to where the IP is being used. Particularly in this case, as I’m not aware of any Vatican-controlled remote networks.
So there are a few possibilities as to who edited Taylor’s wikipedia page:
1) Someone in a Vatican office that was connected using that IP (most likely).
2) Someone connected to a Vatican wifi that used that IP.
3) Someone using that IP at a Vatican remote location (unlikely).
1) Someone in a Vatican office that was connected using that IP (most likely).
2) Someone connected to a Vatican wifi that used that IP.
3) Someone using that IP at a Vatican remote location (unlikely).
Another, very remote, possibility is that someone hacked into the Vatican network and then posted the edits from their network. While possible, that would take a level of sophistication that seems unlikely for this clumsy edit.
The most likely scenario is usually the simplest. In this case, I’d bet it was a employee at a Vatican office that did it, but we can’t rule out it was a non-Vatican employee using a Vatican-controlled wifi.
