My apologies to all. I previously posted here some inaccurate information, which I must now retract and correct. I incorrectly asserted that "DiViNetworks has received $15 million USD worth of venture capital from the International Finance Corporation, a commercial lender and member of the World Bank Group." https://ifcext.ifc.org/ifcext/pressroom/IFCPressRoom.nsf/0/52F1A9E272AAFAB78... In fact, a proper reading of the press release above indicated that IFC only invested $5 million into DiViNetworks. Other public reports however suggest that the company has received at least $15 million USD in venture funding. It is not immediately clear where the additional $10 million USD might have come from. https://pitchbook.com/profiles/company/59066-56 https://www.bizety.com/2015/09/10/cool-startup-divinetworks/ As seen at the pitchbook.com link just above, the company may have used the following address as a U.S. business address in some instances: 1680 Michigan Avenue, Suite 700 Miami Beach, FL 33139 This location appears to be associated with "virtual office" rentals: https://www.davincivirtual.com/loc/us/florida/miami-beach-virtual-offices/fa... On the company's own web site, it provides what would appear to be its one and only business address: https://divinetworks.com/ 10153 1/2 Riverside Drive #526 Los Angeles, CA The above address would appear to be home to a business known as "Mailbox Toluca Lake", which may or may not be a FedEx authorized shipping center: https://local.fedex.com/ca/los-angeles/61623/ The above addresses in Miami and Los Angeles would appear to be inconsistant with other easly findable online documents, including the IFC press release linked to above, which explicitly asserts that the company is located in Israel. It is not immediately clear why an Israeli company would have need of either (a) a virtual office in Miami or (b) a mail drop in Los Angeles. I have been unable to find any evidence of any current or historical state- level business registration for either "Divi Networks" or "DiviNetworks" or "Divi Group" in either Florida or California. The operation of business addresses in either or both states without registration may possibly be a violation of law in those states. It is certainly impossible for any business to file a state-level business tax return in any state in which that business is not registered, due to the lack of the required state business registration number which would have to appear on the tax return in question. As discussed in the IFC funding press release, the company appears to have begun life with the eminently laudable goal to "increase Internet transmission capacities and free up congested internet connections.... in 21 developing countries..." This is certainly a commendable goal by anyone's standards, and one fully worthy of funding from the commercial lending arm of the World Bank. That having been said, it is certainly within the realm of possibility that this initial business model may perhaps not have stood the test of time, and that providing services to developing economies may not have produced sufficent returns to keep the enterprise viable on a long term basis. I have found at least some evidence to suggest that the company may, at present, be pursuing a different business model. In the current era, there are two ways in which any party who can beg, borrow, or steal any large swath of IPv4 address can quickly and effectively monetize those addresses. (And these methods are not entirely exclusive of one another.) The traditional way of monetizing any large block of IPv4 addresses which the lessor does not have, or plan to have, a long term interest in is simply to sub-lease the addresses to snowshoe spammers. Unfortunately for those involved, if this strategy is pursued to the exclusion of any other it renders the IP addresses in question a "wasting asset". Their value declines over time as they become ever more widely blacklisted and thus ever more ineffective for spamming purposes. An alternative monetization strategy which has become increasingly prevalent and widspread in recent years and which does not, generally speaking, engender this "wasting asset" problem (and which also, conveniently, tends to attract entirely less public attention and scrutiny) is to "dress up" the IP block(s) in question, to the extent possible, via relevant RIR WHOIS records, in order to make them appear to be networks containing only Internet end-user "eyeballs". Specifically, the term "residential" is typically used as an integral part of these subterfuges, and a simple google search for "residential proxies" will, at present, turn up a veritable plethora of companies offering as a service exactly such fradulently "dressed up" IPv4 addresses, complete with pre-configured proxy services. (An alternative google search that also gives a window into this little known world is "backconnect proxies".) Above and beyond the amount of Internet-enabled mayhem and havoc that proxies generally can give rise to, not to mention the violations of law, the violations of the Terms of Service of various web sites, or the manipulation of public sentiments (and thereby, perhaps, elections), the dedication of entire blocks of now-scarce IPv4 addresses to proxies whose only point in life is deceptive packet origination represents an ongoing, growing, and colossal waste of this increasingly scarce resource. In August of last year, both journalist Brian Krebs and myself became acutely aware of one one such "residential" proxy seller whose supply of IPv4 addresses was, to say the least, of dubious provenance: The Rise of “Bulletproof” Residential Networks Brian Krebs August 19th, 2019 https://krebsonsecurity.com/2019/08/the-rise-of-bulletproof-residential-netw... So, you may well wonder, what are people actuallt using these dressed up "residential" IP addresses for anyway? And what is the significance of the fact they the addresses in question are being used in conjunction with proxy software? In some cases, no doubt, the proxies and their associated IPv4 addresses are being used for entirely innocent web browsing by people who have been persuaded that evil forces are watching their every online move with sinister intent, and that thus, they need to wear the Internet equivalent of a balaclava whenever they go online. In many and probably most other cases however, it is unambiguously true that banks of "dressed up" IPv4 addresses, together with pre-configured proxy software, are being used for less justifiable or forgivable purposes. Specifically, personal monetary gain, by way of deception, appears to be the primary current application of Internet proxies and their associated IPv4 addresses. At present, the Internet appears to be literally awash in "residential proxies" available for rent. These are NOT being pitched to persons whose geographic locations and/or assocated oppressive governments are preventing them from accessing YouTube or the New York Times or CNN web sites. Rather, these things are being very clearly and deliberately pitched to potential renters who wish to exploit their unique properties, en mass, as a stealthy and deceptive way to effectively "jump the line" when it comes to purchasing limited distribution high end goods with the intent to sell those purchased goods on the applicable secondary market. Think ticket scalping. That would be the primary use of these elaborate setups if it were not for the fact that a rather different commodity which also appears in limited quantities and which can also be resold at a profit on the secondary market had not made its appearance in recent years -- high-end limited edition sneakers. As I have learned since last August, both Brian and myself actually arrived rather late to this party. There was and is an abundance of other coverage of this shady phenomenon, both prior to Brian's blog post, and since: How Bots Are Making It Impossible to Get Your Hands on Hyped Streetwear By Scott Christian May 26, 2017 https://www.esquire.com/style/mens-fashion/news/a55301/using-bots-to-buy-sup... "The first bot prototype—basically patient zero for the current breed—was launched in 2012 in response to a release of the Air Jordan Doernbecher 9" How sneaker bots actually work Jun 7, 2017 https://medium.com/@ayinope/how-sneaker-bots-actually-work-a016fd419646 Inside the Wild World of Sneaker-Buying Bots by Ashwin Rodrigues Aug 14 2017, 6:00am https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/d33vpq/inside-the-wild-world-of-sneaker-b... The War Against Sneaker Bots Peaked at the End of 2018 By Cam Wolf December 26, 2018 https://www.gq.com/story/war-against-sneaker-bots How Bots Ruined Buying Sneakers Tommie Battle Jan 24, 2019 https://www.complex.com/sneakers/2019/01/how-bots-ruined-buying-sneakers Adidas and Nike shoes are more expensive because of ‘sneaker bots’ By Darren Allan December 18, 2019 https://www.techradar.com/news/adidas-and-nike-shoes-are-more-expensive-beca... Online sneaker drop cancelled thanks to bots Marc DeAngelis February 3, 2020 Online sneaker drop cancelled thanks to bots The important take-away from all of the above coverage is that brand name high-end limited edition sneaker manufacturers are and have been wantonly incompetent in their wllingness and/or ability to create buyer registration systems which would eliminate this absurd level of Internet gamesmanship. As we speak, vast gobs of otherwise useful and increasingly scarce IPv4 addresses have been turned to the exclusive purpose of gaming the online purchase systems of these manufacturers. These wantonly careless manufacturers have creasted, on the Internet, nothing short of a clear public nuisance, as well as a kind of artifically generated "tulip mania" scarcity delirium which is now sucking time and talent out of otherwise productive citizens who now devote their time, money, attention, and effort into the utterly unproductive pursuit of the inherently limited arbitrage opportunities that may exist between the primary and secondary sneaker markets. The sound you hear is a million man hours of labor and effort, along with an unknown number of IPv4 addresses, all being flushed down the toilet in the headlong pursuit of absolutely nothing of real or lasting value. So, you may reasonably wonder, what has all this to do with DiviNetworks? Well, it appears to me that in addition to, or perhaps instead of the company's initial admirable goal of bringing better connectivity to developing economies (funded by a World Bank loan), the company may perhaps have also involved itself in the delivery of IPv4 address blocks to another Tel Aviv company that sells... you guessed it... "residential proxies": https://www.bestproxyreviews.com/netnut/ https://www.bestproxyreviews.com/netnut/#divinetworks-powered So, bottom line, it seems that we now have a situation where the World Bank, a venerable international financial institution set up for the express purpose of providing "loans and grants to the governments of poorer countries for the purpose of pursuing capital projects" (ref: Wikipedia) may in this instance instead be indirectly underwriting the ongoing and further destruction of the world's remaining IPv4 address supply, the looting of AFRINIC-managed IPv4 address blocks, and the enrichment of the stockholders of Nike, Adidas, and other high-end sneaker maufacturers as they pursue their socially-destructive business strategies, including but not limited to the creation of fevered and overwrought markets for their own products based on their own artifically engineered perceptions of scarcity and value. Yessiree! The World Bank certainly has a lot to teach those developing economies about the true nature and essence of modern first-world capitalism. We can only hope that they do not learn this depraved lesson on circular, self-serving and anti-social first-world buccaneer capitalism too awfully soon. Regards, rfg