Ethical Hacking

Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package.
Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute

Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors.




Network Security Incidents
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Wireless router behaviour

Subject: Re: Wireless router behaviour
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2004 15:46:07 -0400
On Fri, 10 Sep 2004 13:53:01 -0700, David Gillett <gillettdavid@fhda.edu> wrote:
  The port which was connected to the wired network was one of the
LAN switch ports, and not the WAN port.  So although we saw pings
and proxy ARP replies from the router, it seems unlikely that these
were NATted on behalf of some associated client.  The client whose
footprints led us to the router was, as you'd expect in such a
configuration, using an address from our DHCP pool and neither the
router's nor some other private address.

I find it very odd that you saw proxy arps replies from the router if it was
connected to your network by one of the LAN switch ports. Proxy ARP
usually only happens when you have a gateway device where the clients
do not have MAC access (PPP server), but the fact that the wireless 
client that alerted you to the presence of the router was using an address 
from your DHCP pool shows that there was in fact MAC access for the client.

Odd.

-john

-- 
John Duksta <jduksta@gmail.com>
Can't sleep, clowns will eat me.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>