Re: Hiding NATs with PF

From: jpd (read_the_sig_at_do.not.spam.it.invalid)
Date: 09/28/05 

Date: 28 Sep 2005 12:52:52 GMT

Begin <Npednaa2cOAFZKTeRVnytQ@pipex.net>
On 2005-09-28, Max Bolingbroke <batterseapower{no@spam}hotmail.com> wrote:
> This has covered the two main bases: TTL monitoring and statistical
> analysis of IP IDs. However, I'm still going to be vunerable to passive
> OS fingerprinting.

Vulnerable in what way? If the boxen behind it aren't reachable there
isn't much to attack on that level, now is there?

> Are there any further ways I can have PF munge my
> outgoing packets so look like they all come from the same flavour of TCP
> stack?

Thought of upper-level leakage, like received: headers in outgoing email? 

-- 
  j p d (at) d s b (dot) t u d e l f t (dot) n l .