Hello FemmeFatale,
Monday, June 23, 2003, 1:02:15 PM, you wrote:
F AFAIK there are no SI FW's available for doing app aware
F targeting... a proxy MAY be able to be configured to do so...but it
F is beyond my humble knowledge as to how this would be
F accomplished.
Mine too, but thanks for the
At 11:44 AM 6/23/2003 -0700, you wrote:
Hello Technoslick,
SNIPs some puppy dog tails
I've been snooping, as time permits. There are SI firewalls available,
but I have yet to find an app-aware linux fw. It seems as though the
fw's are based on iptables (a kernel function, as I understand it),
and
Hello Technoslick,
Thursday, June 19, 2003, 4:22:06 AM, you wrote:
T 'Port Triggering' is the feature present on this particular
T router/gateway.
As you know, I have a great interest in app-aware firewalls. They are
useful in protecting against call-home threats. The possibility of
doing this
Hello Technoslick,
Monday, June 16, 2003, 12:00:42 PM, you wrote:
T No, thankfully. It just has to be an executable that shows itself
T in calling for services through ports that need to be opened.
Are you certain that it actually knows that the exact app is running
on the original computer?
Hello Technoslick,
Sunday, June 15, 2003, 7:31:07 AM, you wrote:
T I have a Linksys router/gateway that has the ability to dynamically
T open ports and port ranges when a certain executable is requesting
T to do so from a network client. This has worked very well from
T Windows clients using
On Monday 16 Jun 2003 8:00 pm, Technoslick wrote:
On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 14:32, rikona wrote:
As I have stated before, I have a similar interest, in that I also
want to use video-conferencing, so I have done quite a bit of reading
on the subject.
On the other hand, if your network has several
Hello Anne,
Monday, June 16, 2003, 12:27:17 PM, you wrote:
AW As I have stated before, I have a similar interest, in that I also
AW want to use video-conferencing, so I have done quite a bit of
AW reading on the subject.
Actually, my interest is only in the privacy/security aspects. I have
no
On Monday 16 Jun 2003 9:22 pm, rikona wrote:
Hello Anne,
Monday, June 16, 2003, 12:27:17 PM, you wrote:
AW As I have stated before, I have a similar interest, in that I
also AW want to use video-conferencing, so I have done quite a bit
of AW reading on the subject.
Actually, my interest
although this isn't the solution you want, netstat can still be your friend :)
to see what is happening on your machine (assuming you haven't been rooted but
then all approaches are moot) use:
netstat -tuap
to see all connections that are tcp or udp but not unix sockets, this will
show both
At 11:32 AM 6/16/2003 -0700, you wrote:
Hello Technoslick,
Sunday, June 15, 2003, 7:31:07 AM, you wrote:
snipped the parrots wings
I found this on the net, as a starter:
When Microsoft developed NetMeeting 3.0 they chose to use the existing
h.323 video conferencing protocol. This
well i found that runing netstat as root showed some progs/pids that running
as a user didn't
i think netstat has a continuous mode 'netstat -c', i was thinking you could
do something clever with a script using netstat and grep? and have a filelist
of progs you know about and if 'netstat -cp'
Hello Technoslick,
Monday, June 16, 2003, 3:21:54 PM, you wrote:
T Your spyware software, commercial or malicious, is going out ports
T that would be open in all firewalls that allow HTTP access: port
T 80.
Not necessarily. Tiny, for example, can be set so that the ONLY app
that is allowed to
Hello Technoslick,
Monday, June 16, 2003, 3:50:17 PM, you wrote:
T My Linksys is a BEFSR41. Four fully Switched ports, Cable Modem or
T DSL capable.
It looks as though the Linksys may be getting the app info from Zone
Alarm, which MUST be on each local computer for it to work in that
mode (as I
Hello bascule,
Monday, June 16, 2003, 3:51:43 PM, you wrote:
b line wihtout one of these progs in have the script issue an alert,
b but you'd need to find an expert to do that and such a thing may
b already exist.
A good idea. I'm too much of a newbie to do that, I'm afraid.
Another thought -
At 06:50 PM 6/16/2003 -0400, you wrote:
In trying to setup a full chat session with a friend (that is,
peer-to-peer, not using the ICQ servers), she was able to statically
open 1024 and away we went. For a full chat session, that's probably all
that's needed, but you are also doing file-sharing
At 09:13 PM 6/16/2003 -0400, you wrote:
Make sense, Femme?
T :0)
Ty. Perfectly.
-
FemmeFatale, aka The Skirt
Good Decisions Your boss Made:
We'll do as you suggest and go with Linux. I've always liked that
character from Peanuts.
- Source: Dilbert
Want to buy your Pack or
- Original Message -
From: FemmeFatale [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: newbie [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2003 06:40
Subject: Re: [newbie] [Fwd: [Mandrake Off Topic] LICQ/Dynamically opening
ports in Linksys router]
snipped
Rikona has hit it. ICQ does this as well it seems
On Sunday 15 Jun 2003 10:08 pm, Stephen Kuhn wrote:
On Mon, 2003-06-16 at 00:31, Technoslick wrote:
I've got LICQ configured on my MDK 9.1 workstation with my ICQ
accounts. I tried to open the needed ports on my router for a
full chat session, but it doesn't seem to be working. I cannot
18 matches
Mail list logo
