Apt - strange requests to d16r8ew072anqo.cloudfront.net:80MD5 mismatch on my 12.04 ISO, what is going on?Apt errors since upgrade to 12.04apt-get update successful, but apt-get upgrade failure to connectPackages are not available for installationIssues opening everythingRecover data when Ubuntu 14 crushedunattended-upgrades runs twice every day but never installs anythingHow to get Steam to properly installBroken Packages Fix Problem (For Wine)lubuntu 18.04.1 “unable to fetch some archives”Ubuntu 18.04.1 repositores are not working

Warning about needing "authorization" when booking ticket

Why 1,2 printed by a command in $() is not interpolated?

Why we don’t make use of the t-distribution for constructing a confidence interval for a proportion?

Ability To Change Root User Password (Vulnerability?)

Thread Pool C++ Implementation

Overlapping String-Blocks

Why was this person allowed to become Grand Maester?

Are there any important biographies of nobodies?

Non-aqueous eyes?

English word for "product of tinkering"

Determining fair price for profitable mobile app business

Which languages would be most useful in Europe at the end of the 19th century?

Is it legal for a bar bouncer to confiscate a fake ID

What is inside of the 200 star chest?

How does the Around command at zero work?

Wooden cooking layout

How to hide an urban landmark?

Generate basis elements of the Steenrod algebra

Let M and N be single-digit integers. If the product 2M5 x 13N is divisible by 36, how many ordered pairs (M,N) are possible?

Teaching a class likely meant to inflate the GPA of student athletes

Is it possible to have 2 different but equal size real number sets that have the same mean and standard deviation?

Does the 2019 UA Artificer's Many-Handed Pouch infusion enable unlimited infinite-range cross-planar communication?

Why not invest in precious metals?

sed + add word before string only if not exists



Apt - strange requests to d16r8ew072anqo.cloudfront.net:80


MD5 mismatch on my 12.04 ISO, what is going on?Apt errors since upgrade to 12.04apt-get update successful, but apt-get upgrade failure to connectPackages are not available for installationIssues opening everythingRecover data when Ubuntu 14 crushedunattended-upgrades runs twice every day but never installs anythingHow to get Steam to properly installBroken Packages Fix Problem (For Wine)lubuntu 18.04.1 “unable to fetch some archives”Ubuntu 18.04.1 repositores are not working






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








16















On Saturday (May 18) I started one of my VMs (running Ubuntu 18.04 Server).



To my surprise, the VM almost immediately attempted to connect to d16r8ew072anqo.cloudfront.net:80,
something that I have never seen before--it's a pretty "pristine" installation of Ubuntu,
with no custom apt repositories, and just a few packages installed.
It had never connected to anything suspicious before--mostly to Ubuntu and Snap domains.
(I use Little Snitch to monitor network traffic so I see connections in real time
and can deny them as well.)



I spent some time trying to figure out what happened
and I believe I narrowed it down to unattended-upgrades installing security patches.
Specifically, when I manually reinstalled intel-microcode:amd64 package I was able to
reproduce the strange connection to CloudFront (although it might have been
just a coincidence).



Then, on Monday, I wanted to document the issue in case something similar happens again,
but to my surprise I couldn't reproduce the strange connection anymore.



And the only observable difference on Monday was that the output from
sudo apt-get install --reinstall intel-microcode:amd64 [1] did't have the Ign:1 line.



I searched the web, including http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu, grep-ed
the VM's disk, checked the DNS records of misc. ubuntu.com subdomains,
tried wget-ting different URLs to find a redirect to the suspicious domain--but I couldn't find any clue about the strange connection to CloudFront.



My question is: does anyone know what happened,
or at least noticed the same connection in their logs?



(By the way, I'm aware of one example where the Ubuntu team used CloudFront to relieve their servers:
MD5 mismatch on my 12.04 ISO, what is going on?
--so I'm hoping that maybe this is a similar case?)




[1]:



$ sudo apt-get install --reinstall intel-microcode:amd64
Reading package lists... Done
Building dependency tree
Reading state information... Done
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
Need to get 1,801 kB of archives.
After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
Ign:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates/main amd64 intel-microcode amd64 3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2
Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates/main amd64 intel-microcode amd64 3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2 [1,801 kB]
Fetched 1,801 kB in 20s (89.2 kB/s)
(Reading database ... 107477 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to unpack .../intel-microcode_3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking intel-microcode (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) over (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) ...
Setting up intel-microcode (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) ...
update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
intel-microcode: microcode will be updated at next boot
Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.130ubuntu3.7) ...
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-4.15.0-50-generic









share|improve this question




























    16















    On Saturday (May 18) I started one of my VMs (running Ubuntu 18.04 Server).



    To my surprise, the VM almost immediately attempted to connect to d16r8ew072anqo.cloudfront.net:80,
    something that I have never seen before--it's a pretty "pristine" installation of Ubuntu,
    with no custom apt repositories, and just a few packages installed.
    It had never connected to anything suspicious before--mostly to Ubuntu and Snap domains.
    (I use Little Snitch to monitor network traffic so I see connections in real time
    and can deny them as well.)



    I spent some time trying to figure out what happened
    and I believe I narrowed it down to unattended-upgrades installing security patches.
    Specifically, when I manually reinstalled intel-microcode:amd64 package I was able to
    reproduce the strange connection to CloudFront (although it might have been
    just a coincidence).



    Then, on Monday, I wanted to document the issue in case something similar happens again,
    but to my surprise I couldn't reproduce the strange connection anymore.



    And the only observable difference on Monday was that the output from
    sudo apt-get install --reinstall intel-microcode:amd64 [1] did't have the Ign:1 line.



    I searched the web, including http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu, grep-ed
    the VM's disk, checked the DNS records of misc. ubuntu.com subdomains,
    tried wget-ting different URLs to find a redirect to the suspicious domain--but I couldn't find any clue about the strange connection to CloudFront.



    My question is: does anyone know what happened,
    or at least noticed the same connection in their logs?



    (By the way, I'm aware of one example where the Ubuntu team used CloudFront to relieve their servers:
    MD5 mismatch on my 12.04 ISO, what is going on?
    --so I'm hoping that maybe this is a similar case?)




    [1]:



    $ sudo apt-get install --reinstall intel-microcode:amd64
    Reading package lists... Done
    Building dependency tree
    Reading state information... Done
    0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
    Need to get 1,801 kB of archives.
    After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
    Ign:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates/main amd64 intel-microcode amd64 3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2
    Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates/main amd64 intel-microcode amd64 3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2 [1,801 kB]
    Fetched 1,801 kB in 20s (89.2 kB/s)
    (Reading database ... 107477 files and directories currently installed.)
    Preparing to unpack .../intel-microcode_3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2_amd64.deb ...
    Unpacking intel-microcode (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) over (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) ...
    Setting up intel-microcode (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) ...
    update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
    intel-microcode: microcode will be updated at next boot
    Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.130ubuntu3.7) ...
    update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-4.15.0-50-generic









    share|improve this question
























      16












      16








      16


      1






      On Saturday (May 18) I started one of my VMs (running Ubuntu 18.04 Server).



      To my surprise, the VM almost immediately attempted to connect to d16r8ew072anqo.cloudfront.net:80,
      something that I have never seen before--it's a pretty "pristine" installation of Ubuntu,
      with no custom apt repositories, and just a few packages installed.
      It had never connected to anything suspicious before--mostly to Ubuntu and Snap domains.
      (I use Little Snitch to monitor network traffic so I see connections in real time
      and can deny them as well.)



      I spent some time trying to figure out what happened
      and I believe I narrowed it down to unattended-upgrades installing security patches.
      Specifically, when I manually reinstalled intel-microcode:amd64 package I was able to
      reproduce the strange connection to CloudFront (although it might have been
      just a coincidence).



      Then, on Monday, I wanted to document the issue in case something similar happens again,
      but to my surprise I couldn't reproduce the strange connection anymore.



      And the only observable difference on Monday was that the output from
      sudo apt-get install --reinstall intel-microcode:amd64 [1] did't have the Ign:1 line.



      I searched the web, including http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu, grep-ed
      the VM's disk, checked the DNS records of misc. ubuntu.com subdomains,
      tried wget-ting different URLs to find a redirect to the suspicious domain--but I couldn't find any clue about the strange connection to CloudFront.



      My question is: does anyone know what happened,
      or at least noticed the same connection in their logs?



      (By the way, I'm aware of one example where the Ubuntu team used CloudFront to relieve their servers:
      MD5 mismatch on my 12.04 ISO, what is going on?
      --so I'm hoping that maybe this is a similar case?)




      [1]:



      $ sudo apt-get install --reinstall intel-microcode:amd64
      Reading package lists... Done
      Building dependency tree
      Reading state information... Done
      0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
      Need to get 1,801 kB of archives.
      After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
      Ign:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates/main amd64 intel-microcode amd64 3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2
      Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates/main amd64 intel-microcode amd64 3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2 [1,801 kB]
      Fetched 1,801 kB in 20s (89.2 kB/s)
      (Reading database ... 107477 files and directories currently installed.)
      Preparing to unpack .../intel-microcode_3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2_amd64.deb ...
      Unpacking intel-microcode (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) over (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) ...
      Setting up intel-microcode (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) ...
      update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
      intel-microcode: microcode will be updated at next boot
      Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.130ubuntu3.7) ...
      update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-4.15.0-50-generic









      share|improve this question














      On Saturday (May 18) I started one of my VMs (running Ubuntu 18.04 Server).



      To my surprise, the VM almost immediately attempted to connect to d16r8ew072anqo.cloudfront.net:80,
      something that I have never seen before--it's a pretty "pristine" installation of Ubuntu,
      with no custom apt repositories, and just a few packages installed.
      It had never connected to anything suspicious before--mostly to Ubuntu and Snap domains.
      (I use Little Snitch to monitor network traffic so I see connections in real time
      and can deny them as well.)



      I spent some time trying to figure out what happened
      and I believe I narrowed it down to unattended-upgrades installing security patches.
      Specifically, when I manually reinstalled intel-microcode:amd64 package I was able to
      reproduce the strange connection to CloudFront (although it might have been
      just a coincidence).



      Then, on Monday, I wanted to document the issue in case something similar happens again,
      but to my surprise I couldn't reproduce the strange connection anymore.



      And the only observable difference on Monday was that the output from
      sudo apt-get install --reinstall intel-microcode:amd64 [1] did't have the Ign:1 line.



      I searched the web, including http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu, grep-ed
      the VM's disk, checked the DNS records of misc. ubuntu.com subdomains,
      tried wget-ting different URLs to find a redirect to the suspicious domain--but I couldn't find any clue about the strange connection to CloudFront.



      My question is: does anyone know what happened,
      or at least noticed the same connection in their logs?



      (By the way, I'm aware of one example where the Ubuntu team used CloudFront to relieve their servers:
      MD5 mismatch on my 12.04 ISO, what is going on?
      --so I'm hoping that maybe this is a similar case?)




      [1]:



      $ sudo apt-get install --reinstall intel-microcode:amd64
      Reading package lists... Done
      Building dependency tree
      Reading state information... Done
      0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded.
      Need to get 1,801 kB of archives.
      After this operation, 0 B of additional disk space will be used.
      Ign:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates/main amd64 intel-microcode amd64 3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2
      Get:1 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu bionic-updates/main amd64 intel-microcode amd64 3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2 [1,801 kB]
      Fetched 1,801 kB in 20s (89.2 kB/s)
      (Reading database ... 107477 files and directories currently installed.)
      Preparing to unpack .../intel-microcode_3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2_amd64.deb ...
      Unpacking intel-microcode (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) over (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) ...
      Setting up intel-microcode (3.20190514.0ubuntu0.18.04.2) ...
      update-initramfs: deferring update (trigger activated)
      intel-microcode: microcode will be updated at next boot
      Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.130ubuntu3.7) ...
      update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-4.15.0-50-generic






      apt package-management security unattended-upgrades






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked May 23 at 13:38









      Tomasz ZielińskiTomasz Zieliński

      4071511




      4071511




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          23














          I made some inqurires to the Security and Archive teams about this, as they'd be the authoritative source on whether this was expected behavior or not. The following is a summary of what they shared with me:



          This observed behavior was offloading traffic load from the archive mirrors to Cloudfront, and was done between Wednesday May 15th and Monday May 20th in order to alleviate load from the Archive Servers, specifically for the Kernel and Microcode updates.



          According to those teams, this is the first time such offloading was done via CloudFront, and in this particular case was expected behavior.




          While it looks suspicious, the teams have confirmed with me via IRC that this was expected behavior, and they are surprised that more people hadn't noticed the behavior in the past.



          ULTIMATELY: Not malicious behavior, but instead was expected behavior, and was required in order for things to not overload on the archive servers. (It was also the first time they've had to do this so at least nothing blew up heh)



          Standard behavior of NOT offloading to Cloudfront should be back in place now.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thank you, that's very good news! So I guess that on Monday, May 20th, my trials happened after CloudFront was turned off and that's why I no longer could reproduce the (non-)issue.

            – Tomasz Zieliński
            May 23 at 16:30











          • Debian (of all distros) have been using CloudFront and Fastly CDNs since 2016, so Ubuntu doing the same is nothing new there...

            – grawity
            May 24 at 19:56











          • @grawity except that Ubuntu has never seemed to need to offload this. But you're not wrong it's 'nothing new' in the grand scheme of things but for Ubuntu has not been done much. (And is an atypical observation in Ubuntu.)

            – Thomas Ward
            May 25 at 0:26











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "89"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1145649%2fapt-strange-requests-to-d16r8ew072anqo-cloudfront-net80%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          23














          I made some inqurires to the Security and Archive teams about this, as they'd be the authoritative source on whether this was expected behavior or not. The following is a summary of what they shared with me:



          This observed behavior was offloading traffic load from the archive mirrors to Cloudfront, and was done between Wednesday May 15th and Monday May 20th in order to alleviate load from the Archive Servers, specifically for the Kernel and Microcode updates.



          According to those teams, this is the first time such offloading was done via CloudFront, and in this particular case was expected behavior.




          While it looks suspicious, the teams have confirmed with me via IRC that this was expected behavior, and they are surprised that more people hadn't noticed the behavior in the past.



          ULTIMATELY: Not malicious behavior, but instead was expected behavior, and was required in order for things to not overload on the archive servers. (It was also the first time they've had to do this so at least nothing blew up heh)



          Standard behavior of NOT offloading to Cloudfront should be back in place now.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thank you, that's very good news! So I guess that on Monday, May 20th, my trials happened after CloudFront was turned off and that's why I no longer could reproduce the (non-)issue.

            – Tomasz Zieliński
            May 23 at 16:30











          • Debian (of all distros) have been using CloudFront and Fastly CDNs since 2016, so Ubuntu doing the same is nothing new there...

            – grawity
            May 24 at 19:56











          • @grawity except that Ubuntu has never seemed to need to offload this. But you're not wrong it's 'nothing new' in the grand scheme of things but for Ubuntu has not been done much. (And is an atypical observation in Ubuntu.)

            – Thomas Ward
            May 25 at 0:26















          23














          I made some inqurires to the Security and Archive teams about this, as they'd be the authoritative source on whether this was expected behavior or not. The following is a summary of what they shared with me:



          This observed behavior was offloading traffic load from the archive mirrors to Cloudfront, and was done between Wednesday May 15th and Monday May 20th in order to alleviate load from the Archive Servers, specifically for the Kernel and Microcode updates.



          According to those teams, this is the first time such offloading was done via CloudFront, and in this particular case was expected behavior.




          While it looks suspicious, the teams have confirmed with me via IRC that this was expected behavior, and they are surprised that more people hadn't noticed the behavior in the past.



          ULTIMATELY: Not malicious behavior, but instead was expected behavior, and was required in order for things to not overload on the archive servers. (It was also the first time they've had to do this so at least nothing blew up heh)



          Standard behavior of NOT offloading to Cloudfront should be back in place now.






          share|improve this answer

























          • Thank you, that's very good news! So I guess that on Monday, May 20th, my trials happened after CloudFront was turned off and that's why I no longer could reproduce the (non-)issue.

            – Tomasz Zieliński
            May 23 at 16:30











          • Debian (of all distros) have been using CloudFront and Fastly CDNs since 2016, so Ubuntu doing the same is nothing new there...

            – grawity
            May 24 at 19:56











          • @grawity except that Ubuntu has never seemed to need to offload this. But you're not wrong it's 'nothing new' in the grand scheme of things but for Ubuntu has not been done much. (And is an atypical observation in Ubuntu.)

            – Thomas Ward
            May 25 at 0:26













          23












          23








          23







          I made some inqurires to the Security and Archive teams about this, as they'd be the authoritative source on whether this was expected behavior or not. The following is a summary of what they shared with me:



          This observed behavior was offloading traffic load from the archive mirrors to Cloudfront, and was done between Wednesday May 15th and Monday May 20th in order to alleviate load from the Archive Servers, specifically for the Kernel and Microcode updates.



          According to those teams, this is the first time such offloading was done via CloudFront, and in this particular case was expected behavior.




          While it looks suspicious, the teams have confirmed with me via IRC that this was expected behavior, and they are surprised that more people hadn't noticed the behavior in the past.



          ULTIMATELY: Not malicious behavior, but instead was expected behavior, and was required in order for things to not overload on the archive servers. (It was also the first time they've had to do this so at least nothing blew up heh)



          Standard behavior of NOT offloading to Cloudfront should be back in place now.






          share|improve this answer















          I made some inqurires to the Security and Archive teams about this, as they'd be the authoritative source on whether this was expected behavior or not. The following is a summary of what they shared with me:



          This observed behavior was offloading traffic load from the archive mirrors to Cloudfront, and was done between Wednesday May 15th and Monday May 20th in order to alleviate load from the Archive Servers, specifically for the Kernel and Microcode updates.



          According to those teams, this is the first time such offloading was done via CloudFront, and in this particular case was expected behavior.




          While it looks suspicious, the teams have confirmed with me via IRC that this was expected behavior, and they are surprised that more people hadn't noticed the behavior in the past.



          ULTIMATELY: Not malicious behavior, but instead was expected behavior, and was required in order for things to not overload on the archive servers. (It was also the first time they've had to do this so at least nothing blew up heh)



          Standard behavior of NOT offloading to Cloudfront should be back in place now.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited May 25 at 0:26

























          answered May 23 at 14:57









          Thomas WardThomas Ward

          46.3k23128181




          46.3k23128181












          • Thank you, that's very good news! So I guess that on Monday, May 20th, my trials happened after CloudFront was turned off and that's why I no longer could reproduce the (non-)issue.

            – Tomasz Zieliński
            May 23 at 16:30











          • Debian (of all distros) have been using CloudFront and Fastly CDNs since 2016, so Ubuntu doing the same is nothing new there...

            – grawity
            May 24 at 19:56











          • @grawity except that Ubuntu has never seemed to need to offload this. But you're not wrong it's 'nothing new' in the grand scheme of things but for Ubuntu has not been done much. (And is an atypical observation in Ubuntu.)

            – Thomas Ward
            May 25 at 0:26

















          • Thank you, that's very good news! So I guess that on Monday, May 20th, my trials happened after CloudFront was turned off and that's why I no longer could reproduce the (non-)issue.

            – Tomasz Zieliński
            May 23 at 16:30











          • Debian (of all distros) have been using CloudFront and Fastly CDNs since 2016, so Ubuntu doing the same is nothing new there...

            – grawity
            May 24 at 19:56











          • @grawity except that Ubuntu has never seemed to need to offload this. But you're not wrong it's 'nothing new' in the grand scheme of things but for Ubuntu has not been done much. (And is an atypical observation in Ubuntu.)

            – Thomas Ward
            May 25 at 0:26
















          Thank you, that's very good news! So I guess that on Monday, May 20th, my trials happened after CloudFront was turned off and that's why I no longer could reproduce the (non-)issue.

          – Tomasz Zieliński
          May 23 at 16:30





          Thank you, that's very good news! So I guess that on Monday, May 20th, my trials happened after CloudFront was turned off and that's why I no longer could reproduce the (non-)issue.

          – Tomasz Zieliński
          May 23 at 16:30













          Debian (of all distros) have been using CloudFront and Fastly CDNs since 2016, so Ubuntu doing the same is nothing new there...

          – grawity
          May 24 at 19:56





          Debian (of all distros) have been using CloudFront and Fastly CDNs since 2016, so Ubuntu doing the same is nothing new there...

          – grawity
          May 24 at 19:56













          @grawity except that Ubuntu has never seemed to need to offload this. But you're not wrong it's 'nothing new' in the grand scheme of things but for Ubuntu has not been done much. (And is an atypical observation in Ubuntu.)

          – Thomas Ward
          May 25 at 0:26





          @grawity except that Ubuntu has never seemed to need to offload this. But you're not wrong it's 'nothing new' in the grand scheme of things but for Ubuntu has not been done much. (And is an atypical observation in Ubuntu.)

          – Thomas Ward
          May 25 at 0:26

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Ask Ubuntu!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faskubuntu.com%2fquestions%2f1145649%2fapt-strange-requests-to-d16r8ew072anqo-cloudfront-net80%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Club Baloncesto Breogán Índice Historia | Pavillón | Nome | O Breogán na cultura popular | Xogadores | Adestradores | Presidentes | Palmarés | Historial | Líderes | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegacióncbbreogan.galCadroGuía oficial da ACB 2009-10, páxina 201Guía oficial ACB 1992, páxina 183. Editorial DB.É de 6.500 espectadores sentados axeitándose á última normativa"Estudiantes Junior, entre as mellores canteiras"o orixinalHemeroteca El Mundo Deportivo, 16 setembro de 1970, páxina 12Historia do BreogánAlfredo Pérez, o último canoneiroHistoria C.B. BreogánHemeroteca de El Mundo DeportivoJimmy Wright, norteamericano do Breogán deixará Lugo por ameazas de morteResultados de Breogán en 1986-87Resultados de Breogán en 1990-91Ficha de Velimir Perasović en acb.comResultados de Breogán en 1994-95Breogán arrasa al Barça. "El Mundo Deportivo", 27 de setembro de 1999, páxina 58CB Breogán - FC BarcelonaA FEB invita a participar nunha nova Liga EuropeaCharlie Bell na prensa estatalMáximos anotadores 2005Tempada 2005-06 : Tódolos Xogadores da Xornada""Non quero pensar nunha man negra, mais pregúntome que está a pasar""o orixinalRaúl López, orgulloso dos xogadores, presume da boa saúde económica do BreogánJulio González confirma que cesa como presidente del BreogánHomenaxe a Lisardo GómezA tempada do rexurdimento celesteEntrevista a Lisardo GómezEl COB dinamita el Pazo para forzar el quinto (69-73)Cafés Candelas, patrocinador del CB Breogán"Suso Lázare, novo presidente do Breogán"o orixinalCafés Candelas Breogán firma el mayor triunfo de la historiaEl Breogán realizará 17 homenajes por su cincuenta aniversario"O Breogán honra ao seu fundador e primeiro presidente"o orixinalMiguel Giao recibiu a homenaxe do PazoHomenaxe aos primeiros gladiadores celestesO home que nos amosa como ver o Breo co corazónTita Franco será homenaxeada polos #50anosdeBreoJulio Vila recibirá unha homenaxe in memoriam polos #50anosdeBreo"O Breogán homenaxeará aos seus aboados máis veteráns"Pechada ovación a «Capi» Sanmartín e Ricardo «Corazón de González»Homenaxe por décadas de informaciónPaco García volve ao Pazo con motivo do 50 aniversario"Resultados y clasificaciones""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, campión da Copa Princesa""O Cafés Candelas Breogán, equipo ACB"C.B. Breogán"Proxecto social"o orixinal"Centros asociados"o orixinalFicha en imdb.comMario Camus trata la recuperación del amor en 'La vieja música', su última película"Páxina web oficial""Club Baloncesto Breogán""C. B. Breogán S.A.D."eehttp://www.fegaba.com

          Vilaño, A Laracha Índice Patrimonio | Lugares e parroquias | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegación43°14′52″N 8°36′03″O / 43.24775, -8.60070

          Cegueira Índice Epidemioloxía | Deficiencia visual | Tipos de cegueira | Principais causas de cegueira | Tratamento | Técnicas de adaptación e axudas | Vida dos cegos | Primeiros auxilios | Crenzas respecto das persoas cegas | Crenzas das persoas cegas | O neno deficiente visual | Aspectos psicolóxicos da cegueira | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegación54.054.154.436928256blindnessDicionario da Real Academia GalegaPortal das Palabras"International Standards: Visual Standards — Aspects and Ranges of Vision Loss with Emphasis on Population Surveys.""Visual impairment and blindness""Presentan un plan para previr a cegueira"o orixinalACCDV Associació Catalana de Cecs i Disminuïts Visuals - PMFTrachoma"Effect of gene therapy on visual function in Leber's congenital amaurosis"1844137110.1056/NEJMoa0802268Cans guía - os mellores amigos dos cegosArquivadoEscola de cans guía para cegos en Mortágua, PortugalArquivado"Tecnología para ciegos y deficientes visuales. Recopilación de recursos gratuitos en la Red""Colorino""‘COL.diesis’, escuchar los sonidos del color""COL.diesis: Transforming Colour into Melody and Implementing the Result in a Colour Sensor Device"o orixinal"Sistema de desarrollo de sinestesia color-sonido para invidentes utilizando un protocolo de audio""Enseñanza táctil - geometría y color. Juegos didácticos para niños ciegos y videntes""Sistema Constanz"L'ocupació laboral dels cecs a l'Estat espanyol està pràcticament equiparada a la de les persones amb visió, entrevista amb Pedro ZuritaONCE (Organización Nacional de Cegos de España)Prevención da cegueiraDescrición de deficiencias visuais (Disc@pnet)Braillín, un boneco atractivo para calquera neno, con ou sen discapacidade, que permite familiarizarse co sistema de escritura e lectura brailleAxudas Técnicas36838ID00897494007150-90057129528256DOID:1432HP:0000618D001766C10.597.751.941.162C97109C0155020