if they've got a whitelist for UDP 53 you can openvpn out nicely. i
get hit or miss success with this; most national hotspot services use
a DNS proxy for UDP 53 traffic, so you can try OzyManDNS and bask in
the gratuitous inefficiency of your side channel transport... :)
sadly, ICMP tunnel
On Dec 11, 2007 6:36 PM, coderman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[screwed] the IBSS DIFS timeouts like crazy and network == shit
er, s/IBSS/802.11 MAC distributed point coordination function/
(i've got ad-hoc on the brain, and the lucent demo mode / no-ack
variation works much better for long shot
On Dec 11, 2007 9:27 AM, gmaggro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
... what I dislike about some of these techniques... they lack a certain
potency. If they reliably achieve their goal they are slow; if they have
better throughput then reliability becomes an issue.
order of preference:
a. UDP 53
If there were an easy to use (gold standard == nmap) and robust tool
capable of bypassing all commonly used captive portals, that would make
for a great 'mischief enabler'.
Some googled links for the lazy lurkers...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_portal
There was a tool that would do exactly that, on a long-defunct TOR
hidden service, and it was mentioned in this paper for bypassing
captive portals at airports. The technique, and naturally the tool,
was applicable in most situations involving payment portals.
Unfortunately I don't remember
Hi,
I didn't read all of the documents in detail, but I noticed the first
bunch mentioned spoofing/changing your MAC address to that of someone that
is validated/authorized. This is of course assuming this is feasible and
someone has authenticated already. Many of the hotspots will just simply
Even easier than running a
special tool is to just setup SSHD or a proxy to listen on TCP 53. You
can then tunnel out and do as you please without authenticating to the
captive portal.
Not everyone has access to something listening on 53 that is ready to be
tunneled to. Nor is everyone
Of course you might want to keep the legal aspects in
mind before doing any of that.
On Monday 10 December 2007 12:04:05 gmaggro wrote:
Bah. Who cares about that. Our governments have proven they do not
respect the rule of law; why should we?
Because what you espouse would result in
Because what you espouse would result in general lawlessness, a situation
that
is worse for the common good than what we have now.
That is both an arguable and accurate description of one of my goals.
More specifically, the impact on captive portals would be an escalating arms
race
On Dec 10, 2007 2:04 PM, gmaggro [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Not everyone has access to something listening on 53 that is ready to be
tunneled to. Nor is everyone clever enough to go about doing that sort
of thing.
if they've got a whitelist for UDP 53 you can openvpn out nicely. i
get hit
10 matches
Mail list logo
