On Wed, Aug 14, 2002, Oleg Kobets wrote about "Re: ipchains --string on http":
> you forget that HTTP is stateless protocol. after one GET you will be
> disconnected.
This is only strictly true in HTTP 0.9, a standard that nobody is using for
at least 5 years.
You can make requ
quot; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "My Own Private
List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2002 10:24 PM
Subject: Re: ipchains --string on http
> Quoth Guy Cohen:
>
> > yes, but why netfilter transfers the connection to apache in the first
> > place?
&g
Quoth Guy Cohen:
> yes, but why netfilter transfers the connection to apache in the first
> place?
Do it manually ;-)...
---cuttez---dicez---removez---slicez---ambutez---choppez---
telnet foo.bar.com 80
GET /
GET /zumbu.html
GET /root.exe/uweriwurhiwu?39804759834579suhfksdfhksjdf/389457983457
On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 11:01:56PM +0300, Official Flamer/Cabal NON-Leader wrote:
>
> Therefore, you CANNOT prevent logging info without KNOWING in advance
> that some form of an attack is going to be following a legal connection,
> OR having the kernel inform the application (i.e. netfilter info
Quoth Official Flamer/Cabal NON-Leader:
> The version I have does not have THAT. Mine's Debian, so they COULD have
> chopped it out. Or, it could have been the other way around - it is not
Yes, debian HAS compiled netfilter without extensions.
==
Quoth Guy Cohen:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 09:59:40PM +0300, Official Flamer/Cabal NON-Leader wrote:
> > assume you have developed it yourself. If I am mistaken, please indicate
> > which version of iptables you are using.
>
> 1.2.6a
> look in README
The version I have does not have THAT. Mine'
On Tue, Aug 13, 2002 at 09:59:40PM +0300, Official Flamer/Cabal NON-Leader wrote:
> Quoth Guy Cohen:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm trying to discarded all those annoying windows unicode breakin attempts,
> > iptables -A INPUT -j REJECT -p tcp --dport 80 -m string --string "cmd.exe"
>
> Since as of i
Quoth Guy Cohen:
> Hello,
>
> I'm trying to discarded all those annoying windows unicode breakin attempts,
> iptables -A INPUT -j REJECT -p tcp --dport 80 -m string --string "cmd.exe"
Since as of iptables v1.2.6a I can find no such match rule or option, I
assume you have developed it yourself.
>
> Hi,
>
> I need a quick fix for the following problem: I want to switch between
> ipchains and iptables on a RH7.2 (kernel 2.4.9-31) without rebooting.
>
> I figured I needed to rmmod ip_tables and insmod ipchains.o. ;-)
>
> I flushed iptables, stopped the servic
"Nadav Har'El" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So you might have to remove the iptable_filter module before you can
> remove ip_tables.
Stupid me... Thanks.
--
Oleg Goldshmidt | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[Lisp] is the only computer language that is beautiful.
- Neal Stephenson
On Wed, 2002-04-24 at 10:50, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I need a quick fix for the following problem: I want to switch between
> ipchains and iptables on a RH7.2 (kernel 2.4.9-31) without rebooting.
>
> I figured I needed to rmmod ip_tables and insmod ipchains.
On Wed, Apr 24, 2002, Oleg Goldshmidt wrote about "switching between iptables and
ipchains":
> # /sbin/rmmod ip_tables
> ip_tables: Device or resource busy
> # echo $?
> 1
> What am I forgetting? So far TFW and TFMs did not yield anything
> useful.
Try running lsmod
Hi,
I need a quick fix for the following problem: I want to switch between
ipchains and iptables on a RH7.2 (kernel 2.4.9-31) without rebooting.
I figured I needed to rmmod ip_tables and insmod ipchains.o. ;-)
I flushed iptables, stopped the service, tried to rmmod ip_tables,
and got
# /sbin
llow its
> various modules to work) and thus the kernel would surely get larger.
> btw, netfilter has not just 1 or 2 moduels - it has around 15+ modules -
> unless you ocmpile them all into the kernel itself.
>
> if you already had netfilter in the kernel,and were just missing the
&
hello all.
basicly recompile the kernel with one or two new modules. Ok
I did this once, the only thing changed was one more module.
So why the new kernel (bzimage) was different, some bytes larger.
- diego
=
To unsubscribe, send
rely yours,
Volkind Danny
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of TCL
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2001 3:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: enabling ipchains/iptables
hello
i have slack 8 with kernel 2.4.5
in the last wee
time. never underestimate the power of
the cracker with a scanner.
> i have both ipchains and iptables installed, but unfurtunally, my kernel is
> compiled with no support to both
> is it possible to enable support without recompiling the kernel?
nope.
> if not, how can i make sure
On Fri, 14 Dec 2001, TCL wrote:
Before answering, I warmly suggest using iptables and not ipchains. It's
setup is very similar, and so is the syntax. It pays to invest 30 minutes.
But, if you are determined not to do it, see below (and this will take
much more).
Assuming the kernel yo
hello
i have slack 8 with kernel 2.4.5
in the last week i got my modem working with linux and now is the time to set
up a firewall ruleset
i have both ipchains and iptables installed, but unfurtunally, my kernel is
compiled with no support to both
is it possible to enable support without
Windows computer with "internet connection sharing"
> option enabled. Everything worked OK.
> Most of sites, however, work OK. There are two or three sites that changed
> their behaviour to me since I moved to Linux as a gateway.
>
> On Linux side:
> nothing special. I d
eir behaviour to me since I moved to Linux as a gateway.
On Linux side:
nothing special. I disabled all firewall rules, changed Policies to ACCEPT,
run
ipchains -A forward -i ppp0 -s 192.168.0.0/24 -j MASQ
Still same problem.
What I missed?
Any RTFM with links to docs w
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, mulix wrote:
> >
> > > also (2 questions for the price of one email), i'm looking to implement
> > > traffic limiting on the linux router for internal users (bofh? me?
> > > never. what was your user name again?). what tools am
(2 questions for the price of one email), i'm looking to implement
> traffic limiting on the linux router for internal users (bofh? me?
> never. what was your user name again?). what tools am i looking for?
>
> kernel 2.4.16, approximately latest iptables.
> --
> mulix
>
&g
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, mulix wrote:
>
> > also (2 questions for the price of one email), i'm looking to implement
> > traffic limiting on the linux router for internal users (bofh? me?
> > never. what was your user name again?). what tools am i looking for?
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, mulix wrote:
> also (2 questions for the price of one email), i'm looking to implement
> traffic limiting on the linux router for internal users (bofh? me?
> never. what was your user name again?). what tools am i looking for?
Have you looked at the advanced routing howto?
T
Mulix,
in iptables it is called conntrack :
/proc/net/ip_conntrack
Dani
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, mulix wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, guy keren wrote:
>
> > On 30 Nov 2001, Noam Meltzer wrote:
> >
> > > I guess you didn't really understand what i wanted. I don't want to see
> > > that the module is loa
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, Oded Arbel wrote:
> I don't have that file, but I have /proc/net/ip_conntrack which under
> correct analyzis will yield the list of NATed connections.
> (kernel 2.4.13, iptables)
i must have looked at it the other time when no internal client was
connected, since i only saw t
ED]>; "IGLU" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2001 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: checking the functioning of an ipchains module
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, guy keren wrote:
>
> > On 30 Nov 2001, Noam Meltzer wrote:
> >
> > > I guess you didn't
On Sat, 1 Dec 2001, guy keren wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2001, Noam Meltzer wrote:
>
> > I guess you didn't really understand what i wanted. I don't want to see
> > that the module is loaded. I want to see what is it doing while it's
> > running.
>
> "what its doing" has different interpretations. if it
On 30 Nov 2001, Noam Meltzer wrote:
> I guess you didn't really understand what i wanted. I don't want to see
> that the module is loaded. I want to see what is it doing while it's
> running.
"what its doing" has different interpretations. if it is 'understanding
how it works' - use the source,
~~O0=-
>"He took his vorpal sword in hand:
> Long time the manxome foe he sought -
> So rested he by the Tumtum tree.
> And stood awhile in thought."
>
> [L.Carrol "Jabberwacky"]
>
> On 30 Nov 2001, Noam Meltzer
ng.
bye
-=O0~O0=-
"He took his vorpal sword in hand:
Long time the manxome foe he sought -
So rested he by the Tumtum tree.
And stood awhile in thought."
[L.Carrol "Jabberwacky"]
On 30 Nov 2001, Noam Meltzer wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I re
Hi!
I recently installed the icq module for ipchains in my linux masqurading
machine. (and used the opportunity to upgrade to kernel 2.2.20)
Anyway, I was wondering if there's a way to see how that module is
functioning. Something like when i do: "ipchains -L -M" or something
simi
Hello Eran
the gateway thing (Masquerading & Forwarding) is in fact ipchains' job. I
guess that your firewalling script first cleans ipchains rules (so it
'disconnects' the other computers from the internet), and then putting the
firewall thing.
another possibility is that t
Hi,
I have networked my computers at Home that the Linux box is the gateway and
the other computers are windows Boxes. The Internet is shared without any
problems between the computers on the network. but, when Im starting my
ipchains script thhe gateway still has the connection but the rest
? "SYN " : /* "PENANCE" */ "", count);
>
>
> It goes like this:
>
> Packet log:
> [if action=FW_REDIRECTthen destniation ip] "eth0")>
> as adevertised in header>
> < the Terms of Service bit field> field f
IPchains HOWTO walks you through reading the syslog messages. I dont know how
relevant this to your messages, but it could supply you with the info you need.
Boaz.
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm trying to understand a certain reoccouring denied packet. The trouble
> is
Gilad Ben-Yossef wrote:
>
> Use the source, Luke: ;-)
>
It's from /usr/src/linux/net/ipv4:507 (dump_packet).
Most rights reserved to one, Linux Torvalds, may he live long and
prosper although it was actually written
by Rusty.
Gilad.
==
Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> Hi
>
> I'm trying to understand a certain reoccouring denied packet. The trouble
> is I can't find any reference to the meaning of all the fields in the
> syslog message. Can anybody point me to such a reference?
Use the source, Luke: ;-)
printk("%s PROTO=%d %d.%d.%d.
Hi
I'm trying to understand a certain reoccouring denied packet. The trouble
is I can't find any reference to the meaning of all the fields in the
syslog message. Can anybody point me to such a reference?
thanks
--
Tzafrir Cohen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir
===
rules perform a complete "computation", and then the packets coming out
> > of it are re-processed by the rules in a second table. i already so a case
> > where this allowed for more functionality then s possible using kernel
> > 2.2's chains.
>
> Hmm. How is th
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Alex Shnitman wrote:
> > btw, in the new kernel (2.4), where netfilter is used, there is a new
> > notion of tables. unlike usage of multiple chains, usage of multiple
> > tables does add extra functionality, in that it allows you to have one set
> > of rules perform a comple
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Alex Shnitman wrote:
> Hi, guy!
>
> On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 10:01:07AM +0200, you wrote the following:
>
> > btw, in the new kernel (2.4), where netfilter is used, there is a new
> > notion of tables. unlike usage of multiple chains, usage of multiple
> > tables does add ex
ules perform a complete "computation", and then the packets coming out
> of it are re-processed by the rules in a second table. i already so a case
> where this allowed for more functionality then s possible using kernel
> 2.2's chains.
Hmm. How is that different from fro
On Mon, 1 Jan 2001, Adi Stav wrote:
> Hmm. How is that different from from creating custom chains in
> ipchains and sending packets from one chain to another?
with chains - when one chain matched a rule, then its action is taken
place, and no more rule matching is performed on that packe
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, guy keren wrote:
>
> On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Jonathan Ben-Avraham wrote:
>
> > The ipchains HOWTO contains an example firewall configuration with
> > separate chains defined for each triple of source network, destination
> > network and direction
I think your best solution would be squid's ACLS.
Restrict users from routing through with ipchains, and user the proxy
instead.
Isaac Aaron
Quality Bytes
System1 wrote:
> Hi,
> we are using here IPChains Firewall.
> Is there anyway to block complete domain such as *.icq.c
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000, "Stanislav Malyshev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, dual licensing code as GPL and BSD (or GPL and PD, for example) is a
You can't dual license as GPL and PD -- public domain is not a license.
A license refers to the terms under which you may use copyrighted works
while
On Sat, 30 Dec 2000, "Stanislav Malyshev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> MZ>> I just think RMS's legal counsel
> MZ>> is pretty sound. Is that a problem for you?
>
> Yes
..
> since I do not
> have my own law professor, all I can do is ranting about it.
Not so. For a couple of hundred dollars, you
On Fri, 29 Dec 2000, "Stanislav Malyshev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For GPL, RMS is the copyright law.
No it isn't. RMS has his legal counsel (a professor of law) issue his
opinions. If you think you opinions of law are worth more, you're
welcome to do whatever you want. I just think RMS's le
Hi, guy!
On Sun, Dec 31, 2000 at 10:01:07AM +0200, you wrote the following:
> btw, in the new kernel (2.4), where netfilter is used, there is a new
> notion of tables. unlike usage of multiple chains, usage of multiple
> tables does add extra functionality, in that it allows you to have one set
Looks like this thread is never going to end. Does anybody still remember why
it was titled "ipchains"? :)
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000, Omer Zak wrote about "GPL or not GPL, that is the question (was:
Re: ipchains)":
> I believe that all the arguments about GPLed software (start
On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Jonathan Ben-Avraham wrote:
> The ipchains HOWTO contains an example firewall configuration with
> separate chains defined for each triple of source network, destination
> network and direction. That is, there are chains "net-dmz", "dmz-net",
Hi,
The ipchains HOWTO contains an example firewall configuration with
separate chains defined for each triple of source network, destination
network and direction. That is, there are chains "net-dmz", "dmz-net",
"net-int", "int-net", "int-dmz"
Hi, Stanislav!
I'll skip the GPL-related part of the email since it has already been
discussed to death by others. (I think it's been a bit like "a
watermelon is red from the inside" "no, asshole, it's green from the
outside" type of thing, but whatever.)
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 11:07:47PM +0200
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 10:25:31PM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> > I'd say that as soon as a company releases software, it doesn't matter
> > whether the company's core business is hardware or not. The software
> > is governed by the same laws.
> >
> > I'm not sure I understand: do you mean the G
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 10:14:33PM +0200, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
> AS>> That is necessary for copyleft. If you could take Linux and release it
>
> Sure. So be aware that any time you read "proprietary" in FSF texts, you
> should read "non-GPL", since GPL restricts not only more str
I believe that all the arguments about GPLed software (starting from
ipchains and then wandered elsewhere) overlooked one important point.
This point is what originally motivated RMS in his GNU crusade.
His original point is that users must have the power to modify software
and tailor it to
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000, Adi Stav wrote about "Re: ipchains":
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 07:27:34PM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> > There's another problematic issue about the GPL. It's quite clear how it
> > applies to software companies, but how does it a
AS>> That is necessary for copyleft. If you could take Linux and release it
Sure. So be aware that any time you read "proprietary" in FSF texts, you
should read "non-GPL", since GPL restricts not only more strict licenses,
but also less strict. I understand why it's done, but let's be honest -
do
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:44:52PM +0200, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
> NH>> What kind of judge is going to make a decision against a company
> NH>> when in a 100,000 line code, 50 lines "somehow distantly
> NH>> resemble" code from a GPLed program? If the developer only looks
> NH>> at
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 07:27:34PM +0200, Nadav Har'El wrote:
> But the GPL causes the following sort of "comtamination": Take any of the
> important pieces of GPL software on the Internet. Most, if not all, of them
> have been written by more than one person. Some of them have been written
> or u
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 09:29:51PM +0200, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
> AS>> Have you actually READ the GPL? It does not define "derived work"
> AS>> anywhere, leaving that to copyright law. RMS has said as much, too.
>
> For GPL, RMS is the copyright law. Since if RMS thinks it's viola
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 09:26:59PM +0200, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
> AS>> > ==quote==
> AS>> > Richard Stallman wrote:
> AS>> >
> AS>> > That you don't distribute binaries does not change the fact that your
> AS>> > source code is designed to include Readline in the program. You
> AS
MZ>> > For GPL, RMS is the copyright law.
MZ>>
MZ>> No it isn't. RMS has his legal counsel (a professor of law) issue his
MZ>> opinions. If you think you opinions of law are worth more, you're
MZ>> welcome to do whatever you want. I just think RMS's legal counsel
MZ>> is pretty sound. Is that a p
> NH>> What kind of judge is going to make a decision against a company
> NH>> when in a 100,000 line code, 50 lines "somehow distantly
> NH>> resemble" code from a GPLed program? If the developer only looks
> NH>> at the code, that's what going to happen - he won't suddenly
> NH>> have 10,000 l
AS>> Have you actually READ the GPL? It does not define "derived work"
AS>> anywhere, leaving that to copyright law. RMS has said as much, too.
For GPL, RMS is the copyright law. Since if RMS thinks it's violating GPL,
you probably will very soon forced to GPL it or pull it, if only you don't
wan
AS>> > ==quote==
AS>> > Richard Stallman wrote:
AS>> >
AS>> > That you don't distribute binaries does not change the fact that your
AS>> > source code is designed to include Readline in the program. You
AS>> > cannot do that, now that your license is incompatible with the GPL.
AS>> > ==end quote=
NH>> What kind of judge is going to make a decision against a company
NH>> when in a 100,000 line code, 50 lines "somehow distantly
NH>> resemble" code from a GPLed program? If the developer only looks
NH>> at the code, that's what going to happen - he won't suddenly
NH>> have 10,000 lines identic
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000, Adi Stav wrote about "Re: ipchains":
> Likewise, no program can
> "contaminate" other programs and change their license, whether or not
> you link them together. What the GPL is saying that you cannot
>
> If you want to use othe
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 09:34:22AM +0200, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
> AS>> That's a common misconception. It should have been obvious, but
> AS>> somehow never is, that no amount of licensing trickery can make one
> AS>> program be considered a derivative work of an unrelated program.
At 11:07 PM 12/28/00 +0200, you wrote:
>AS>> The same copyright system that disallows you to copy ripped MP3s
>AS>> disallows companies to make proprietary products out of GPLed
>AS>> software. Our copyright system is just fine.
>
>With our GPLed software the matter is pretty complicated. General
AS>> That's a common misconception. It should have been obvious, but
AS>> somehow never is, that no amount of licensing trickery can make one
AS>> program be considered a derivative work of an unrelated program. And
See, this is an official position of RMS. I have quotes from him
personally sayin
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, "Stanislav Malyshev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> RIAA is within it's right when it uses current law. I agree that it might
> be immoral
When some company does something that is within the law but immoral, I
tend to lose respect for that company's requests. Whatever happened
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 11:07:47PM +0200, Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo wrote:
> With our GPLed software the matter is pretty complicated. Generally, GPLed
> software is referred to as a "free software". But, in fact, it's not free
> at all, in the common meaning of the word "freedom". You cannot
AS>> The same copyright system that disallows you to copy ripped MP3s
AS>> disallows companies to make proprietary products out of GPLed
AS>> software. Our copyright system is just fine.
With our GPLed software the matter is pretty complicated. Generally, GPLed
software is referred to as a "free
Hi, Moshe!
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 06:40:21PM +0200, you wrote the following:
> > I gave it as an example and i was talking about _illegal_ mp3s,
> > those that are copyrighted, since MP3 is just a format and there's
> > nothing illegal in that.
> > I figured that it would be obvious, but appear
> > Nice of you sticking to an unimportant part that i brought as an
> > example,
>
> Many of us do not think that the issue of copying MP3s is
> unimportant --
> some of us think it's a case study in how copyright law went
> well beyond
> what it was meant to do originally.
It was offtopic to
On Wed, 27 Dec 2000, Alon Oz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I gave it as an example and i was talking about _illegal_ mp3s,
> those that are copyrighted, since MP3 is just a format and there's
> nothing illegal in that.
> I figured that it would be obvious, but appearently not for everyone.
Exactl
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" wrote:
>
> AO>> Using copyrighted material which you do not own is illegal.
> AO>> Storing mp3 SONGS that you did not buy/have the disk is
>
> Now you seem to assume every MP3 song is illegal copyrighted
> material. MPAA would laugh in joy reading this. They have
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" wrote:
>
> AO>> Using copyrighted material which you do not own is illegal.
> AO>> Storing mp3 SONGS that you did not buy/have the disk is
>
> Now you seem to assume every MP3 song is illegal copyrighted
> material. MPAA would laugh in joy reading this. They have
AO>> Using copyrighted material which you do not own is illegal.
AO>> Storing mp3 SONGS that you did not buy/have the disk is
Now you seem to assume every MP3 song is illegal copyrighted
material. MPAA would laugh in joy reading this. They have enormous success
in delegitimizing innocent file fo
AO>> 1 line more and you'll see I noted "related" packets,
That depends on how your firewall understands "related". If it understands
it as something more than current connection - install another firewall.
AO>> The target at the end of the process is slip a packet
AO>> through the gateway and i
>
> AO>> 2. It can receive connection to the ICQ port
>
> Wrong. Firewall won't let incoming connection in. It would only allow to
> receive UDP packets inside "virtual circuit" created by outgoing
> connection.
1 line more and you'll see I noted "related" packets,
Since i noted a part of a pro
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" wrote:
>
> AO>> Even if the CEO does. Seen any company that the users don't hold mp3s
> AO>> on their computers? It's illegal in the US and most startups are
> AO>> registered in the US.
>
> MP3 format is illegal in US? News for me. Is WAV going to be banned too?
AO>> Even if the CEO does. Seen any company that the users don't hold mp3s
AO>> on their computers? It's illegal in the US and most startups are
AO>> registered in the US.
MP3 format is illegal in US? News for me. Is WAV going to be banned too?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \/ There shall be couns
AO>> 1. the computer on 192.168.1.78(example) is up
Nice. Most computers tend to be up when people are working.
AO>> 2. It can receive connection to the ICQ port
Wrong. Firewall won't let incoming connection in. It would only allow to
receive UDP packets inside "virtual circuit" created by outg
Moshe Zadka wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, Alon Oz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 1 problem though, by using firewall piercing techniques you probably
> > violate your contract with the company.
>
> And what part of "I'm an advocate of company policy/polite request rather
> then technical so
On Tue, 26 Dec 2000, Alon Oz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1 problem though, by using firewall piercing techniques you probably
> violate your contract with the company.
And what part of "I'm an advocate of company policy/polite request rather
then technical solutions" did I fail to make clear?
Moshe Zadka wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Dec 2000 17:53:08 +0200, Alon Oz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > As you said, the sysadmin was an idiot, if a sysadmin wants
> > he can easily block ICQ.
>
> ssh UDP forwarding to home machine. 'Nuff said.
1 problem though, by using firewall piercing techniqu
Moshe Zadka wrote:
>
> On Mon, 25 Dec 2000 16:41:49 +0200, System1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > using ICQ remote attacker is able to make full port scan on networks behind
> > the firewall.
>
> No, when a user uses the client with a bug, a remote attacker is able to
No, it's a protocol
On Mon, 25 Dec 2000 16:41:49 +0200, System1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> using ICQ remote attacker is able to make full port scan on networks behind
> the firewall.
No, when a user uses the client with a bug, a remote attacker is able to
> If ICQ gives people the ability to make scans of my
"Stanislav Malyshev a.k.a Frodo" wrote:
>
> AO>> But if icq.com(example) got my packet and know my "secret" intranet
> AO>> addresses
>
> Oh, yeah, those defined in top-secret RFC1918? 10.1.1.1? 10.10.1.1?
> 192.168.1.1? 172.16.1.1? Am I l33t haxx0r already?
> Guess how many pings is it going to
did any of you consider using the icq masuerading module along with a
masquerading firewall, in order to hide the local IP addresses?
you can find the link to this module's page on the IP masquerading HOWTO.
this module's doc describes an option to replace the local ("secret" :) )
IP with the I
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of System1
Sent: Monday, December 25, 2000 5:50 PM
To: 'Nadav Har'El'; 'Alon Oz'
Cc: System1; 'Hetz Ben Hamo'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: ipchains
this is not correct.
with simple
AO>> But if icq.com(example) got my packet and know my "secret" intranet
AO>> addresses
Oh, yeah, those defined in top-secret RFC1918? 10.1.1.1? 10.10.1.1?
192.168.1.1? 172.16.1.1? Am I l33t haxx0r already?
Guess how many pings is it going to take me to know each
internet-accessible address on y
S>> the first step is using udp sniffer.
UDP sniffer on what?
S>> after that you have tools you can find on the web to preform scans in the
S>> network of the victim.
How? Can you name one such tool?
S>> you must have direct connection to the user for that. (I think its ICQ
S>> default).
ICQ
S>> using ICQ remote attacker is able to make full port scan on networks behind
S>> the firewall.
How exactly one does that? Can you elaborate?
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] \/ There shall be counsels taken
Stanislav Malyshev /\ Stronger than Morgul-spells
phone +972-3-9316425/\
Nadav Har'El wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 25, 2000, Alon Oz wrote about "Re: ipchains":
> > The ICQ protocol reveals the real IP of the computer running the client,
> > so even if you use GNU replacements it doesn't matter.
>
> So what? Unless you have a
AO>> The ICQ protocol reveals the real IP of the computer running the client,
AO>> so even if you use GNU replacements it doesn't matter.
AO>> This "feature" opens a window for "crackers" to use various firewall
AO>> penetrating/piercing techniques.
If the computer is behind the firewall, most ch
1 - 100 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
