Re: Testing bridge capabilities
Quoth Andrew Del Vecchio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on 2007-12-30 21:18:29 -0800: > GRC says port is closed but not stealthed. Firestarter shows that I have > a remote connection via tor on port 433, and TCP433 is allowed. What > could still be going wrong here? Okay, you know what? _443_ or _433_? Which is in your Tor config? Which are you testing? Is it even consistent? If you're getting them confused, that sounds like the first thing to fix! ---> Drake Wilson
Re: Testing bridge capabilities
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 GRC says port is closed but not stealthed. Firestarter shows that I have a remote connection via tor on port 433, and TCP433 is allowed. What could still be going wrong here? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks, Andrew - -- People just like you lose untold millions in personal wealth due to frivolous lawsuits and unfair government seizures. Are you protected? Read the Asset Protection Crash Course at http://www.keepyourassets.net?andrew to find out how to protect your hard-earned assets. F. Fox wrote: > Andrew Del Vecchio wrote: >> How do I go about >> testing my functionality? Also, if I can't use 443, are there other >> typically not blocked ports that it would be worth using? > > AFAIK, Cox doesn't block port 443 - at least not here. I have "kitsune" > listening on 443 (via redirect, of course). > > As far as testing ports (assuming all you want to know is if it's > open)... other than having other users Telnet to you, I've used "Shields > Up" to see if its listening: > http://grc.com > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHeHulgwZR2XMkZmQRAjVEAJ9ID/b3GnCuSqHGK7HUOGwrVfdG4ACgpAkN omjpg1xn81olD/YBX8d4KEU= =3Q5b -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Testing bridge capabilities
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Andrew Del Vecchio wrote: > How do I go about > testing my functionality? Also, if I can't use 443, are there other > typically not blocked ports that it would be worth using? AFAIK, Cox doesn't block port 443 - at least not here. I have "kitsune" listening on 443 (via redirect, of course). As far as testing ports (assuming all you want to know is if it's open)... other than having other users Telnet to you, I've used "Shields Up" to see if its listening: http://grc.com - -- F. Fox: A+, Network+, Security+ Owner of Tor node "kitsune" http://fenrisfox.livejournal.com -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHdg33bgkxCAzYBCMRCK7LAJ96XI1bmJJq7f58rbwzDAmO4SrCtwCfXHGT QP2KZGrqdGflZgqN7fxewmI= =nsyh -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Testing bridge capabilities
I've got my OR set up to be a bridge, and everything seems to be going ok. However, I suspect that my ISP (Cox Communications) may be blocking HTTP port 433, as I can't get a confirmation on it. Well geez .. that's easy .. just tell us your IP address and we'll see if we can telnet to port 443. Email somebody privately if you want ONE test, email the list if you want several. ~Mike.
Testing bridge capabilities
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hey all, I've got my OR set up to be a bridge, and everything seems to be going ok. However, I suspect that my ISP (Cox Communications) may be blocking HTTP port 433, as I can't get a confirmation on it. I know for sure that they block port 80 as of 2000 or 2001 due mostly to the Code Red worm that all those Windows losers got infected with. How do I go about testing my functionality? Also, if I can't use 443, are there other typically not blocked ports that it would be worth using? I'd rather provide bridge capabilities to SOME firewalled users rather than NONE if possible... Thanks, Andrew - -- People just like you lose untold millions in personal wealth due to frivolous lawsuits and unfair government seizures. Are you protected? Read the Asset Protection Crash Course at http://www.keepyourassets.net?andrew to find out how to protect your hard-earned assets. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHcw/igwZR2XMkZmQRAlHyAJ9zFt8uMG2Wr/xTyZ895t2CvrrY4ACgtv/b atxVIihRdqCyuYbWkii4clM= =eJcV -END PGP SIGNATURE-
