Can´t change the MAC-address in Big Sur

[lifeform]

Hi,

I am currently on a old Macbook Pro 2013 - 13-incher. Loving it.. Very fast, and I get to do all the things I need to do.

But yeah:

I followed this Guide 100%: https://osxdaily.com/2021/09/05/change-mac-address-macos-mac-spoof/

But it in both these way, doesnt ever change the MAC-address of my computer and network device.

Any idea how to actually fix this??

 

[lifeform]

Update:

OK, it works after all:

lifeforms-MacBook-Pro:~ lifeform$ ifconfig en0 | grep ether ether 00:03:ff:28:ee:c8 lifeforms-MacBook-Pro:~ lifeform$ sudo spoof-mac randomize en0 lifeforms-MacBook-Pro:~ lifeform$ ifconfig en0 | grep ether ether 00:50:56:6b:34:a7

Just the MAC-address on the attached image that didnt change. Is this possible to change at all or? Its just some nerds on a chat that have blocked me, because they violated several GRPD-"errors" - and we got upset that they do this.

So its just this. I need to change the MAC-address since its seems they are blocking me out on this? What other can they block out on? I use VPN, so the IP-changes every time.

Maybe the host of my computer or similiar?

 

[svenmany]

So, your MacBook is communicating with some server which is blocking you. What software are you using that is sending your MAC address to that server?

MAC address aren't really needed for networking purposes other than for communication between devices on your LAN.

 

[svenmany]

So, your MacBook is communicating with some server which is blocking you. What software are you using that is sending your MAC address to that server?

MAC address aren't really needed for networking purposes other than for communication between devices on your LAN.

Please ignore that. Well, I learned something new that I should have known for years. The MAC address is delivered to the server at a lower level in the protocol stack; I see it in a Wireshark trace run on my Windows server when connecting to it from my Mac.

 

[lifeform]

So what preferences or settings can they block and ban me on, if not the IP?

I am using Express VPN...

 

[lifeform]

Yeah, ok. Ignored... This is the only parameter I think they can block my certain computer.

Its to enter the stupid www.chat.no site, where they have done 10000000 of GPRD-violations.


lets take em down friends?? They are using a lot of stupid Windows computers in there also

 

[svenmany]

Have you tried accessing them without using the VPN? It could be they are blocking ranges of IP addresses used by the VPN, or they are detecting VPN usage in general and preventing access. I've certainly encountered websites that don't work when I have my VPN up. (My payroll company was one.)

 

[svenmany]

By the way, my prior intuition about MAC address privacy was consistent with

https://www.quora.com/Do-the-websit...ebsite-to-see-its-users-MAC-addresses?share=1

Thanks to your thread, I've learned something very interesting and my intuition is now quite different.

 

[svenmany]

Yeah, ok. Ignored... This is the only parameter I think they can block my certain computer.

Its to enter the stupid www.chat.no site, where they have done 10000000 of GPRD-violations.


lets take em down friends?? They are using a lot of stupid Windows computers in there also

Probably not a good idea to ask for that.

P.S. again The jury is out still (in my mind) whether they can get your MAC address. I realize now that my test was within my LAN. So the MAC address I'm seeing on my server is the MAC address of the last machine that sent the packet to it, which was my Mac. I believe that the MAC address that the chat server would see is the MAC address of the last router that delivered the packet to them.

In any case, good luck with your issue.

 

[posguy99]

So the MAC address I'm seeing on my server is the MAC address of the last machine that sent the packet to it, which was my Mac.

Unless it crossed a routed interface, in which case the MAC is the address of the routed interface facing you.

 

[svenmany]

Unless it crossed a routed interface, in which case the MAC is the address of the routed interface facing you.

Right! In my case not.

When I said "within my LAN", I guess I meant LAN segment - that collection of interfaces that are reachable from each other using ARP broadcasts. Routers don't propagate ARP broadcasts and both my server and my Mac have each other's MAC address in their ARP cache ("arp -a").

So, I guess the MAC address of the OP's machine is not being used by the remote server for any kind of blocking. My money is still on the VPN being the problem.

 

[lifeform]

Hmm.. I am connecting out of this:

What did you conclude on this??

Actually Meet Aurora one time

<3 <3 Maybe one day

Is there more things I need to alter than my MAC-address?

 

[svenmany]

Did you try connecting with your VPN off?

 

[lifeform]

Hi and good morning

Yeah, tried multiple times, and tried again now.. The idiot site www.chat.no wont open at my part.

 

[bogdanw]

Hi and good morning

Yeah, tried multiple times, and tried again now.. The idiot site www.chat.no wont open at my part.

It's not you, it's them.
It's just a badly configured website, that is sometimes down.
nslookup chat.no gives you the adress 188.166.121.116, opening the adress in any browser returns
404 Not Found
nginx/1.18.0 (Ubuntu)
Try traceroute chat.no in Terminal when is working and when is not working to see the difference.

 

[svenmany]

It's not you, it's them.
It's just a badly configured website, that is sometimes down.
nslookup chat.no gives you the adress 188.166.121.116, opening the adress in any browser returns
404 Not Found
nginx/1.18.0 (Ubuntu)
Try traceroute chat.no in Terminal when is working and when is not working to see the difference.

There's a good chance you're right. But I have some vague, naive intuition that raises some doubt.

I have configured servers supporting multiple name-based virtual hosts. That is, the domain name you use to arrive at the server chooses the content to deliver. Such servers might not respond to IP address queries, quite likely returning a 404. 404 means you did reach some web server that was up; the web server simply returned a 404 saying that the resource requested from the server was not available.

Also, I'd imagine an edge-server (effectively a gateway to other servers) would require the actual domain name to determine which internal server to deliver the packet to. All domain names supported by that edge server would resolve to the same IP address, that of the edge-server.

I'm just throwing out some possibilities which could explain the 404 in response to an IP address query.

 

[svenmany]

Hi and good morning

Yeah, tried multiple times, and tried again now.. The idiot site www.chat.no wont open at my part.

On the slight chance that they have identified you as someone to block, the cookies in your browser could be identifying you. Try a different browser or clear the cookies of the browser you're using.

 

[bogdanw]

Both say it's down
"Is Chat Down Right Now?" https://www.isitdownrightnow.com/chat.no.html
"Down for Everyone or Just Me" https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/chat.no
And accessed through a VPN server in Norway:
"Secure Connection Failed
An error occurred during a connection to www.chat.no. PR_END_OF_FILE_ERROR
The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem."

 

[svenmany]

Both say it's down
"Is Chat Down Right Now?" https://www.isitdownrightnow.com/chat.no.html
"Down for Everyone or Just Me" https://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/chat.no
And accessed through a VPN server in Norway:
"Secure Connection Failed
An error occurred during a connection to www.chat.no. PR_END_OF_FILE_ERROR
The page you are trying to view cannot be shown because the authenticity of the received data could not be verified.
Please contact the website owners to inform them of this problem."
View attachment 1922017

Now that's convincing!

 

[svenmany]

Now that's convincing!

Accessing the server by domain name gets no response at all. Accessing the server by IP address gets an immediate 404. So, when accessing by IP address, the unavailable resources which do not respond are not even being contacted.

I'd be very interested to see what happens when one tries again to access by IP address once the server is back up.