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. |

| Subject: | RE: 0.0.0.0 Probes |
|---|---|
| Date: | Sat, 23 Oct 2004 11:51:48 +0100 |
Dear All, I am trying to troubleshoot a problem we have, on a particular site they use a PPTP VPN connection to our office, at present we just use Windows XP DUN for this - I will be changing this soon to a IPSEC tunnel but just need to get this working. When use A dials the VPN server they connect without a problem and the VPN registers as established. But then the next day when User B tries on our VPN server it displays his source address as 0.0.0.0 and then refuses the connection, User A tries and I get his original source IP. This only displays a source IP as 0.0.0.0 for User B... Would this mean that his PC could be infected with a worm that is trying to hide the course IP. Kind Regards Keith -----Original Message----- From: Miles Stevenson [mailto:miles@mstevenson.org] Sent: 22 October 2004 19:02 To: security-basics@securityfocus.com; gillettdavid@fhda.edu Cc: 'John Smithson' Subject: Re: 0.0.0.0 Probes David, <snip>
These packets are not *to* 0.0.0.0; they just claim to be *from* there. Unless a router is specifically configured to check the source address for validity, it won't care. (The RFC passage you quote prevents attempts to *reply* to such packets from saturating the whole Internet.)
</snip> Agreed. Thank you for the correction.
"..SHOULD NOT originate datagrams addressed to 0.0.0.0".
Use of the words "originate" and "to" in the same phrase to represent traffic flow seems, at first glance, to be in conflict with each other, and is likely the source of my misinterpretation. Another example of the importance of semantics when then intention is to communicate accurately. -- Miles Stevenson miles@mstevenson.org PGP FP: 035F 7D40 44A9 28FA 7453 BDF4 329F 889D 767D 2F63
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Searching for Canadian IT Security agencies...., Don Parker |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Searching for Canadian IT Security agencies...., Stacey Blanc |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: 0.0.0.0 Probes, Miles Stevenson |
| Next by Thread: | RE: 0.0.0.0 Probes, xyberpix |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |