Re: Hiding NATs with PF
From: Max Bolingbroke (batterseapower_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/28/05
- Next message: Max Bolingbroke: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Previous message: Max Bolingbroke: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- In reply to: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Next in thread: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Reply: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 28 Sep 2005 07:53:23 -0700
> What are you protecting yourself against exactly ?
Well, the problem is that I am going to be connecting to a network
which has a strict limit of 1 IP address per person but also
inexplicably has a policy where you are not allowed to run your own
router. I'm trying to circumvent this restriction :). If you don't want
to help me given this, I would understand.
> > 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?
>
> You mean a http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/p0f-help/
> response looking something like ?
>
> UNKNOWN [65535:56:1:64:M1438,N,W3,N,N,T,S,E:P:?:?] (up: 8454 hrs) ->
> 213.134.128.25:80 (link: unknown-1478)
That would be nice, but I've been using that page to diagnose my setup
and it stubbonly tells me I am running OpenBSD whatever I do. How did
you achieve this signature? With PF?
Thanks for your reply,
Max
- Next message: Max Bolingbroke: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Previous message: Max Bolingbroke: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- In reply to: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Next in thread: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Reply: Greg Hennessy: "Re: Hiding NATs with PF"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|