From Slashdot: Comcast goes after NAT users
Marvin Bellamy
Marvin.Bellamy at innovision.com
Fri Jan 25 14:20:44 CST 2002
Can you give some details? I don't see how it is possible to see
machines behind an IPF/IPNAT server.
Aaron wrote:
>Of course. Keep in mind that using IP fragmentation (with some fragment
>overlaying techniques), any Packet filtering firewall can be bypassed to
>reveal the machines behind it. Also, you can use products like NMAP and
>Firewalk (under Linux, of course) to see if the offending machine is a
>firewall-type device and what's behind it. Weather Comcast is that smart, I
>don't know but from what I've heard from the people on this list and some
>friends who use them, I doubt it.
>
>Aaron
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Duane Attaway" <dattaway at attaway.org>
>To: "jim" <jim at weathercom.com>
>Cc: <kclug at kclug.org>
>Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 11:42 PM
>Subject: Re: From Slashdot: Comcast goes after NAT users
>
>
>>I have a question. How can they technically do this? Could this be scare
>>tactics or can they really "see" other computers behind a firewall? Is
>>there clues in the headers that give it away? Would they have to sniff
>>port 80 and see the odd things like different browser versions at the same
>>time (Linux Mozilla AND MSIE at the same time?) Maybe I haven't paid much
>>attention to tcpdump, but I haven't seen any clues that any of those
>>packets from my cablemodem are going to make a few additional hops.
>>
>>On Thu, 24 Jan 2002, jim wrote:
>>
>>>Any Comcast employees want to comment on this folderol. I only have one
>>>computer, but it's connected to the 'net via a Linksys firewall/router
>>>because Comcast won't do squat about security. They going to come after
>>>
>me
>
>>>next? I'm checking out DSL tomorrow.
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Kclug
mailing list