David,

> From: "David B. Cook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 15:46:47 -0400 (EDT)

Thank you again, here we are fighting 6 hours time zone difference ;-)


> Well you don't want to use the whole Windows environment over the
> tunnel - it would be painfully slow. But to get filesystem access
> (Network Neighbourhood) so that you can remotely access your DATA
> files you need to point Network Neighbourhood at the localhost for
> the tunnel.

Just what my "road-warriors" want...


> Get Tunellier to forward 137/138/139 from locahost...

I have been using PuTTY this afternoon at work (I was wrong - it
*does* support command line arguments and sessions) because it allows
Public/Private Key Authentification (which allows me to revoke and
renew a user's Public/Private Key pair without effecting the user's
password and account) and have made a floppy which allows a Windows
box to have tunnels to ports 13[7-9] on the Win NT Server inside the
LEAF Firewall.

I tested it from my Win NT work-station and a "netstat -a" at the
cmd.exe prompt reveals a nice set of listening sockets on
127.0.0.1:13[7-9]

However, now here at home, having shown that the SHH connection
through the Firewall works (console, X forwarding etc.), I *can't* see
the listening sockets on 127.0.0.1:13[7-9] on this Win 95 box with a
"netstat -a".

Seems like a Win NT/Win 95 difference.  I will have to investigate...


> ... then go Start -> Find -> Computer and type in "\\127.0.0.1\" and
> Find Now.  This should get you to the remote end of the tunnel.

My problem was finding the "Microsoft-ism" to access my end of the
tunnel.  Thanks, now I know what to try (on a *non* Win 95 box!).


> It is important to remember that the tunnel emminates from the
> machine where the ssh server resides but it does not need to be
> pointed at it. It can be Samba on the that server or something else
> on that LAN.

The day before yesterday I *wouldn't* have twigged the above, today I
already did.  My SSH tunnel through the Firewall ends at a Linux box
on the lan, but forwards the connections to the Win NT Server on the
lan.


> If you don't want to use \\127.0.0.1\ then you can try adding MS
> Loopback as an additional adapter to your WinXX machine and give it
> a non-127.0.0.1 address probably in one of the non-routable blocks
> ie;172.16.1.1. Then you don't blow away localhost functionality of
> whatever you tunnel.

Sorry, I don't understand the above.  What do you mean with "don't
blow away localhost functionality of whatever you tunnel" ?

Also, "Route print" (on my Win 95 box) does show 127.0.0.1, but how do
I "add MS Loopback as an additional adapter" and give a non-routable
IP address?

Linux I can manage, but this MS stuff... ;-)


> dbc.


Greetings

Mark


> On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Mark Plowman wrote:
> 
> > David,
> >
> > > From: "David B. Cook" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 09:47:28 -0400 (EDT)
> > >
> > > Port forwarding through ssh is a *fabulous* solution.
> >
> > I am new to this (forwarding through ssh), but *indeed* it does
> > look neat.
> >
> >
> > > Look at Tunnelier (http://www.bitvise.com/tunnelier.html) for
> > > WinX environments.
> >
> > Thanks!  I am also investigating various other possibilities,
> > PuTTY comes into the picture for me because it supports Public Key
> > authentification whilst I don't think Tunnelier does (or am I
> > wrong?).  But on the other hand PuTTY doesn't appear to support
> > configuration files and command line parameters (drat!).
> >
> >
> > > I forward 137/138/139 to my house and I can use my Samba shares
> > > from anywhere through an encrypted tunnel.
> >
> > OK, here comes the question:
> >
> > Yesterday I was playing with this, forwarding 137/138/139 through
> > an encryted tunnel (still *on* the company network - I haven't yet
> > punctured my LEAF Firewall!) from a Win NT box to a Linux box.
> >
> > Experiments with tunneling HTTP were easy, point browser at
> > localhost or configure the browser with localhost as proxy and
> > Bingo!
> >
> > However, how do I get the MS client software (this is for rodent
> > bound road-warriors) to look into the tunnel?  Or did you do it
> > with SAMBA related tools on Linux?
> >
> >
> > > MS functionality without their security problems! (I know,
> > > technically I have extended the risk element on associated
> > > server procs from my server to the end-of-line Windows device
> > > ... but don't burst my bubble!)
> >
> > Yeah, it's nice, but the worries persist...
> >
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > Mark


_______________________________________________
Leaf-user mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-user

Reply via email to