| Home | Forums | Reviews | Guides | Newsgroups | Register | Search |
 |
| Thread Tools |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
John Dalberg <2> wrote in
news:760qtd5rw9k8$.19hhvv2pnsb83$.: > On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 06:30:36 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: > >> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >> news:1trrqc7x9r7v5.1mcd6ap9biy36$.: >> >>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 07:11:43 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: >>> >>>> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >>>> news:: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Are there software for remote control of another computer which >>>>> work over port 80 because of a firewall? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yeah, there are Remote Desktop appliactions that will work over >>>> HTTP. But if you think a FW Admin will not spot that traffic over >>>> HTTP and know something is up if you're trying to do this from work >>>> to home, you would be wrong. >>> >>> Even if the admin spots the traffic, what will be the issue? >>> >>> >> >> You are compromising the company's network making contact with your >> home network that has not been approved and is most likely a non >> secure situation. That's the issue. The issue is that you don't have >> the authority to do it or they would have given you that authority to >> make that contact. >> >> What's so important that you would risk the company's security like >> that and possibly put your job in jeopardy? >> >> I have seen employees' severely reprimanded or terminated for such >> security breaches. As a matter of fact, I have seen people be >> terminated for a far less security breach on the network than what >> you want to do. >> >> Any FW or Network Security Admin worth his or her beans will spot >> your traffic as that is their job with you using a company machine >> and DHCP IP linked to the machine on the company's LAN. They know the >> LAN IP and the remote WAN IP traffic is going to and coming from by >> looking at the logs. And they do review those logs on a routine >> basis. > > I don't believe what you're saying is true technically. When you allow > http traffic on port 80 that's pretty safe under a browser control. > You're talking as if we are opening a direct link between two > computers and bad stuff is going to pass freely from the outside to > the inside, which is not the case. I work for a bank and we allow > webex sessions from the outside to troubleshoot issues. It's pretty > safe. You have to go through a third party gateway. > > Check out totalrc.net. It's IMPOSSIBLE to do any harm to the internal > network because it's pure http traffic inside a browser with no > ActiveX or Java or anything installed in the client. Just mappged > images that you click on to do stuff on the remote server. > Technically, in my opinion it's a clever way of doing it with total > security. > > If it's so safe what you're trying to do, then run it by the FW and Network Admins and let them give you their opinions instead of you snaking around and trying doing it. You are there to work and you're on company time. You are not there to do what you're trying to do. You are making contact and it has NOT been approved for you to make this contact. You are there to work. At one place I worked, there was this Finance Controller who was making contact with porn sites on the company machine during lunch hour. They spotted that traffic and the guy was terminated for it. Network security install backdoors on company computers and they sit there and watch workers at those workstations watching every move the employee makes and I have seen this. Many companies are aware of the mis- use of the company machine on company time and they are watching. You have not been given the authorization to do it and they will spot you and you can count on it. So, you go right ahead and make that unauthorized contact with your home network. You may regret that you did it. I got rolled on the carpet for doing it and thank God they did terminate me at the time. Duane  |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
John Dalberg <2> wrote in
news:760qtd5rw9k8$.19hhvv2pnsb83$.: > On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 06:30:36 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: > >> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >> news:1trrqc7x9r7v5.1mcd6ap9biy36$.: >> >>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 07:11:43 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: >>> >>>> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >>>> news:: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Are there software for remote control of another computer which >>>>> work over port 80 because of a firewall? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yeah, there are Remote Desktop appliactions that will work over >>>> HTTP. But if you think a FW Admin will not spot that traffic over >>>> HTTP and know something is up if you're trying to do this from work >>>> to home, you would be wrong. >>> >>> Even if the admin spots the traffic, what will be the issue? >>> >>> >> >> You are compromising the company's network making contact with your >> home network that has not been approved and is most likely a non >> secure situation. That's the issue. The issue is that you don't have >> the authority to do it or they would have given you that authority to >> make that contact. >> >> What's so important that you would risk the company's security like >> that and possibly put your job in jeopardy? >> >> I have seen employees' severely reprimanded or terminated for such >> security breaches. As a matter of fact, I have seen people be >> terminated for a far less security breach on the network than what >> you want to do. >> >> Any FW or Network Security Admin worth his or her beans will spot >> your traffic as that is their job with you using a company machine >> and DHCP IP linked to the machine on the company's LAN. They know the >> LAN IP and the remote WAN IP traffic is going to and coming from by >> looking at the logs. And they do review those logs on a routine >> basis. > > I don't believe what you're saying is true technically. When you allow > http traffic on port 80 that's pretty safe under a browser control. > You're talking as if we are opening a direct link between two > computers and bad stuff is going to pass freely from the outside to > the inside, which is not the case. I work for a bank and we allow > webex sessions from the outside to troubleshoot issues. It's pretty > safe. You have to go through a third party gateway. > > Check out totalrc.net. It's IMPOSSIBLE to do any harm to the internal > network because it's pure http traffic inside a browser with no > ActiveX or Java or anything installed in the client. Just mappged > images that you click on to do stuff on the remote server. > Technically, in my opinion it's a clever way of doing it with total > security. > > A correction <I got rolled on the carpet for doing it and thank God they didn't terminate me at the time.> Duane |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
John Dalberg <2> wrote in news:1cmfdlfl2zv9g
$.: > On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 20:41:43 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: > >> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >> news:760qtd5rw9k8$.19hhvv2pnsb83$.: >> >>> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 06:30:36 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: >>> >>>> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >>>> news:1trrqc7x9r7v5.1mcd6ap9biy36$.: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 07:11:43 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >>>>>> news:: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are there software for remote control of another computer which >>>>>>> work over port 80 because of a firewall? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, there are Remote Desktop appliactions that will work over >>>>>> HTTP. But if you think a FW Admin will not spot that traffic over >>>>>> HTTP and know something is up if you're trying to do this from work >>>>>> to home, you would be wrong. >>>>> >>>>> Even if the admin spots the traffic, what will be the issue? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> You are compromising the company's network making contact with your >>>> home network that has not been approved and is most likely a non >>>> secure situation. That's the issue. The issue is that you don't have >>>> the authority to do it or they would have given you that authority to >>>> make that contact. >>>> >>>> What's so important that you would risk the company's security like >>>> that and possibly put your job in jeopardy? >>>> >>>> I have seen employees' severely reprimanded or terminated for such >>>> security breaches. As a matter of fact, I have seen people be >>>> terminated for a far less security breach on the network than what >>>> you want to do. >>>> >>>> Any FW or Network Security Admin worth his or her beans will spot >>>> your traffic as that is their job with you using a company machine >>>> and DHCP IP linked to the machine on the company's LAN. They know the >>>> LAN IP and the remote WAN IP traffic is going to and coming from by >>>> looking at the logs. And they do review those logs on a routine >>>> basis. >>> >>> I don't believe what you're saying is true technically. When you allow >>> http traffic on port 80 that's pretty safe under a browser control. >>> You're talking as if we are opening a direct link between two >>> computers and bad stuff is going to pass freely from the outside to >>> the inside, which is not the case. I work for a bank and we allow >>> webex sessions from the outside to troubleshoot issues. It's pretty >>> safe. You have to go through a third party gateway. >>> >>> Check out totalrc.net. It's IMPOSSIBLE to do any harm to the internal >>> network because it's pure http traffic inside a browser with no >>> ActiveX or Java or anything installed in the client. Just mappged >>> images that you click on to do stuff on the remote server. >>> Technically, in my opinion it's a clever way of doing it with total >>> security. >>> >>> >> >> A correction >> >> <I got rolled on the carpet for doing it and thank God they didn't >> terminate me at the time.> > > What did you do that made them be able to spot you? > > What part of this don't you understand? Any inbound or outbound traffic to/from the company network on any TCP or UDP port is being logged by the company's FW. You cannot disguise that traffic. The log shows the remote WAN IP and LAN IP for to/from traffic, along with date and time of the connections. These logs are kept on a daily basis for month's worth of data. They can run reports against that log data and produce a report or reports showing what kind of traffic activity by IP (s) and cross correlate data to determine suspicious activity. I had permission to use the remote desktop application to connect to any company machine around the world to diagnose application problems on the applications I supported. What I didn't have permission to do was connect to my home network and they spotted that traffic. They set FW rules to block any inbound or outbound traffic with my ISP's domain on any port and that killed my activities and then I was rolled on the carpet. You think that they cannot stop inbound or outbound traffic to your ISP's domain. You think that they cannot determine that traffic is going to an ISP's domain from a company machine that has a company DHCP IP assigned to it and track it back to you. You would be wrong. You can use port 80 all you want. But it's their job to track traffic to and from the company's network and protect the company's interest whether that be someone trying to hack the network or mis-use a company machine, on the company network and accessing the Internet. And on top of that, you're trying to do this on a financial institution's network. You're asking for trouble. Duane |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
John Dalberg <2> wrote in
news:nadav4ztk7zw.1ju7nakq61sij$.: > On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:57:25 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: > >> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >> news:760qtd5rw9k8$.19hhvv2pnsb83$.: >> >>> On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 06:30:36 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: >>> >>>> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >>>> news:1trrqc7x9r7v5.1mcd6ap9biy36$.: >>>> >>>>> On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 07:11:43 GMT, Duane Arnold wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> John Dalberg <2> wrote in >>>>>> news:: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Are there software for remote control of another computer which >>>>>>> work over port 80 because of a firewall? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, there are Remote Desktop appliactions that will work over >>>>>> HTTP. But if you think a FW Admin will not spot that traffic over >>>>>> HTTP and know something is up if you're trying to do this from >>>>>> work to home, you would be wrong. >>>>> >>>>> Even if the admin spots the traffic, what will be the issue? >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> You are compromising the company's network making contact with your >>>> home network that has not been approved and is most likely a non >>>> secure situation. That's the issue. The issue is that you don't >>>> have the authority to do it or they would have given you that >>>> authority to make that contact. >>>> >>>> What's so important that you would risk the company's security like >>>> that and possibly put your job in jeopardy? >>>> >>>> I have seen employees' severely reprimanded or terminated for such >>>> security breaches. As a matter of fact, I have seen people be >>>> terminated for a far less security breach on the network than what >>>> you want to do. >>>> >>>> Any FW or Network Security Admin worth his or her beans will spot >>>> your traffic as that is their job with you using a company machine >>>> and DHCP IP linked to the machine on the company's LAN. They know >>>> the LAN IP and the remote WAN IP traffic is going to and coming >>>> from by looking at the logs. And they do review those logs on a >>>> routine basis. >>> >>> I don't believe what you're saying is true technically. When you >>> allow http traffic on port 80 that's pretty safe under a browser >>> control. You're talking as if we are opening a direct link between >>> two computers and bad stuff is going to pass freely from the outside >>> to the inside, which is not the case. I work for a bank and we allow >>> webex sessions from the outside to troubleshoot issues. It's pretty >>> safe. You have to go through a third party gateway. >>> >>> Check out totalrc.net. It's IMPOSSIBLE to do any harm to the >>> internal network because it's pure http traffic inside a browser >>> with no ActiveX or Java or anything installed in the client. Just >>> mappged images that you click on to do stuff on the remote server. >>> Technically, in my opinion it's a clever way of doing it with total >>> security. >>> >>> >> >> If it's so safe what you're trying to do, then run it by the FW and >> Network Admins and let them give you their opinions instead of you >> snaking around and trying doing it. >> >> You are there to work and you're on company time. You are not there >> to do what you're trying to do. >> >> You are making contact and it has NOT been approved for you to make >> this contact. You are there to work. >> >> At one place I worked, there was this Finance Controller who was >> making contact with porn sites on the company machine during lunch >> hour. They spotted that traffic and the guy was terminated for it. >> >> Network security install backdoors on company computers and they sit >> there and watch workers at those workstations watching every move the >> employee makes and I have seen this. Many companies are aware of the >> mis- use of the company machine on company time and they are >> watching. >> >> You have not been given the authorization to do it and they will spot >> you and you can count on it. >> >> So, you go right ahead and make that unauthorized contact with your >> home network. >> >> You may regret that you did it. >> >> I got rolled on the carpet for doing it and thank God they did >> terminate me at the time. > > Because some FW admins are paraoid or retarded. If if they don't > understand what I am trying to do, they will say NO without giving a > convincing reason just to end the discussion becaause they're not sure > what might happen and they want to jsut be safe. They are doing the job the company has hired them to do, which is to protect the company's intrest. Not under any circumstances should you be trying to make contact with your home network unless you have a valid reason to be doing so on the behalf of the company. If you don't have that valid reason and you don't have that permission to do so and you do it, you're in the wrong if you are caught. It's as simple as that and it is grounds to be severely reprimanded or terminated. You are trying to do something that you're not supposed to be doing and you're using the company's equipment, time the company is paying for you to be doing your job and not mis-use the company. Companies frown on employees that buck the system or mis-use the company and they can and will take care of the situation by any means necessary. All you have to do is get in that bad light and see what happens to you. Whatelse can I say? It's your situation and not mine and you do what you feel is best for you to do. Duane |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
> I have worked for many companies and used opened ports to connect to > outside servers. Nothing happened. Firewall admins are busy trying to > protect computers from outside attacks. They are not trying to protect computers. They are protecting the company's network and the company's interest it is an Internet/Network FW they are working with and not some personal FW on a machine protecting a machine. And people are not as stupid as you make them out to be. And I have worked for many companies as well. .. > Not from inside to the > outside. You don't get viruses, worms or whatever by using a remote > control software like pcanywhere. The last time I looked and used pcanywhere, it has a feature to xfer files from the host to the client and client to host and I have used it to xfer all kinds of files such a program executables that could be infected on one machine and xfered them to another machine. So what you're saying above, I am not buying it. As there is nothing to stop one from xfering files if one chooses to do so infected or not infected. Companies are more easily attacked by employees behind the FW than can ever be done from some outside intruder. They are already *behind* the FW. FW and Network admins are becoming more and more aware of what's happing behind the FW. > > As for porn sites, it's easy to spot these using content filtering > software and hardware. It's stupid to go to 'illegal' sites at work > because these domain names/ip addresses are on blacklists. The same thing can be applied to ISP's as well. I got a WatchGuard at home and know all about that. And as far as I am concerned, your point is moot. > > You're reading from the employee manual. I am aware of the risks and > the mumbo jumbo and that's not the point of my post. I am looking for > some software. No I am using common sense and have seen what happens to employees that think they can buck the system and do what they want and not think that something cannot happen to them or they cannot be caught. If you're looking for this software, then drop a post in a FW and Security NG maybe they can advise you. Duane |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| VOIP over VPN over TCP over WAP over 3G | Theo Markettos | UK VOIP | 2 | 02-14-2008 03:27 PM |
| What is best remote control help desk software to use for tech support over internet? | dv | Computer Support | 5 | 10-28-2005 01:25 PM |
| FS: JP1 cable to program your universial remote control, now youcan control anything you want! | Mike | DVD Video | 0 | 07-15-2005 01:46 AM |
| Remote Assistance fails to connect, remote remote host name could not be resolved | Peter Sale | Wireless Networking | 1 | 12-11-2004 09:09 PM |
| Difference between Remote Desktop and Remote Desktop for Admin | Dave Marden | MCSE | 16 | 01-24-2004 12:47 PM |
