| Home | Forums | Reviews | Guides | Newsgroups | Register | Search |
 |
| Thread Tools |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
| |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:22:41 -0500, DasFox wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:17:15 -0500, katio wrote: > >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 12:48:19 -0500, DasFox wrote: >> >>> Hide the IP, then you're not exposed to internet threats of any types >>> you can imagine... >>> >>> I assumed as GEEKS when I talked about this post everyone had a >>> clue... >>> >>> As Geeks you should know that if you want to get hacked you expose >>> your IP and Ports..., >>> >>> That's all there is to it...when it comes to loosing your privacy and >>> anonymity and that's the LEVEL I was coming from... >>> >>> Protecting that privacy and anonymity, PROTECTING THAT IP...! >>> >>> HIDE THE IP, PROTECT THE PORTS! >> >> Sorry to say this but you got it wrong. That's absolutely not how it >> works. >> >> As long as you don't have an IPv6 address there is no point in hiding >> one's IP. There's only a limited pool of public IPv4 addresses and >> they are constantly hammered by automated attacks, all of them. Even >> if that wasn't the case you most likely got a dynamic IP and whoever >> had this IP assigned to before probably didn't use a VPN... >> >> Don't keep any services running facing the internet. If you do make >> sure you use a strong MAC system, up to date software and preferably >> white list allowed IPs. There really isn't much to worry with the >> default home setup these days. OSs got good firewall rules ootb and >> pretty much everyone uses a router with NAT. >> >> If you come out stealth here with your home IP you are as secure >> against these sort of threats as it gets: >> >> http://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?bh0bkyd2 >> >> It's different with targeted attacks but I don't think that's part of >> your threat model. If you have one other than "all them out thar", you >> stupid git. > > No I don't have it wrong... Sure you do... > > Most ISPs where I live do not hand out static IPs for Broadband, of > course they are dynamic, BUT those Dynamic IPs stay with you for 30-45 > days...or LIFE... So what? Having a more or less static IP address is a GOOD thing if you're smart. Saves you from having to deal with the aftermath of the previous owner and his P2P antics or soch. > With your IP out there and a cheapy firewall, you can be owned... The best firewall in the world is free. And even lesser firewalls are perfectly capable of spitting back "unreachable" packets in response to anonymous requests. Just like boundary equipment does when the host being probed actually DOESN'T exist. Yes, Gibson's machine hiding snake oil is little more than security theater designed to dupe the masses. Nonexistent machines don't eat packets, something actually SAYS they're not there. So when packets magically disappear it's a sure sign there's a machine at that IP address. And one owned by a noob at that.  > There's a VERY BIG point to hiding your IP and not exposing it and I > can't believe you don't think so... I can't believe there's still people out there who are so willing to swallow whatever bile a media whore like Gibson vomits up. > How do you think people get hacked and what you don't think boxes > don't get hacked anymore? Of course they do... Actually, port hacking like you're describing accounts for almost ZERO successful attacks. But don't let little things like facts bother you. [...] > Maybe because you used the word HOME user you think that this makes it > ok and it is good enough? Yes for a lot of average users that may be > true, but in todays world with all the changes over the past 20 years > I don't believe as a Tech that the Windows firewall is good enough > anymore... It's fine, as software firewalls go. It's also completely unnecessary in modern times with modern equipment. I don't think there's an off the shelf router on the market that doesn't include a firewall these days. That and NAT alone make your machine completely invisible to the outside. > > Even for Grandma just surfing the web and emailing the grandchildern, > her box can be hacked and used to commit crimes, so in that sense, no > it's not just as good as it gets... Things like "stealth" aren't just not good enough, or "good as it gets", they're worse than doing nothing in a lot of scenarios. And completely meaningless in the rest. |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:26:55 -0500, DasFox wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:25:29 -0500, Ari Silverstein wrote: > >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:22:41 -0500, DasFox wrote: >> >>> Windows has a firewall and using it will make you stealth YET that is >>> not as good as it gets... >>> >>> Maybe because you used the word HOME user you think that this makes it >>> ok and it is good enough? Yes for a lot of average users that may be >>> true, but in todays world with all the changes over the past 20 years >>> I don't believe as a Tech that the Windows firewall is good enough >>> anymore... >>> >>> Even for Grandma just surfing the web and emailing the grandchildern, >>> her box can be hacked and used to commit crimes, so in that sense, no >>> it's not just as good as it gets... >> >> Good enough against who? Who is your adversary? Which ver of Windoz, >> which firewall, how is it configured? Take your dick out of your ear >> unless you are trying to stir your brainz with it. lol > > Who says I don't understand that you hack a different OS in a > different way...? > > You are certainly not gaining access to Unix like you would Windows > and also all the different firewalls..., Um.... sorry, wrong again. You're not doin so well today kiddo. The simple truth of the matter is that Windows and *nix are pretty much attacked and compromised the same way these days. Since the dawn of "cross platform" development and things like web standards, the lines have been blurring and the attacks more service or software specific. IOW, neither OS is really attacked so much these days, as the software underneath it and the messed up configurations of the admins above it are. > What you think I'm CLUELESS here?" Well, yeah... you've pretty much demonstrated that beyond any doubt.  |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 15:49:34 -0500, Android wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:26:55 -0500, DasFox wrote: > >> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:25:29 -0500, Ari Silverstein wrote: >> >>> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:22:41 -0500, DasFox wrote: >>> >>>> Windows has a firewall and using it will make you stealth YET that is >>>> not as good as it gets... >>>> >>>> Maybe because you used the word HOME user you think that this makes it >>>> ok and it is good enough? Yes for a lot of average users that may be >>>> true, but in todays world with all the changes over the past 20 years >>>> I don't believe as a Tech that the Windows firewall is good enough >>>> anymore... >>>> >>>> Even for Grandma just surfing the web and emailing the grandchildern, >>>> her box can be hacked and used to commit crimes, so in that sense, no >>>> it's not just as good as it gets... >>> >>> Good enough against who? Who is your adversary? Which ver of Windoz, >>> which firewall, how is it configured? Take your dick out of your ear >>> unless you are trying to stir your brainz with it. lol >> >> Who says I don't understand that you hack a different OS in a >> different way...? >> >> You are certainly not gaining access to Unix like you would Windows >> and also all the different firewalls..., > > Um.... sorry, wrong again. You're not doin so well today kiddo. > > The simple truth of the matter is that Windows and *nix are pretty much > attacked and compromised the same way these days. Since the dawn of "cross > platform" development and things like web standards, the lines have been > blurring and the attacks more service or software specific. IOW, neither OS > is really attacked so much these days, as the software underneath it and > the messed up configurations of the admins above it are. There are attacks that happen in a lot of ways, not just through websites... DDos, DOS, Exploits, backdoors, and on and on... You know I don't mind having a conversation as long as it's going to be respectful and not starting to become a troll fest, because sitting around talking about reality is total BS! There are still attacks into boxes it's called in the UNIX WORLD GAINING ROOT ACCESS! What you've never heard of gaining root, as though that also has no basis in reality? >> What you think I'm CLUELESS here?" > > Well, yeah... you've pretty much demonstrated that beyond any doubt. WRONG...TROLL elsewhere and you spelt your name wrong...LOL -- THANKS -- Gays make sick attempt at Harry Potter http://www.methodshop.com/gadgets/re...-stick/big.jpg https://groups.google.com/group/alt....6f94c317a526bd https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.ph...9&postcount=25 Anybody with an internet connection, 5 grand, an iq above room temperature and basic literacy can grow outstanding cannabis. |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 16:01:50 -0500, DasFox wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2011 15:42:32 -0500, Android wrote: > >>> With your IP out there and a cheapy firewall, you can be owned... >> >> The best firewall in the world is free. > > NAME IT...with cites... Give me some design specifics and an intelligent assessment of your threat model, and I'll answer your question in no uncertain terms. And it WILL include a free firewall befitting your needs. It will NOT, however, include crap "software firewalls". (If you have half an IQ point free you already know where I'm going) Now, back to what you snipped and ran from. Lets see if you can man up or not... whether your self-stroking persona actually has any clue at all, or if you're nothing but hot air and don't even know what the hell I'm talking ABOUT, let alone understand it... > Most ISPs where I live do not hand out static IPs for Broadband, of > course they are dynamic, BUT those Dynamic IPs stay with you for 30-45 > days...or LIFE... So what? Having a more or less static IP address is a GOOD thing if you're smart. Saves you from having to deal with the aftermath of the previous owner and his P2P antics or soch. > With your IP out there and a cheapy firewall, you can be owned... The best firewall in the world is free. And even lesser firewalls are perfectly capable of spitting back "unreachable" packets in response to anonymous requests. Just like boundary equipment does when the host being probed actually DOESN'T exist. Yes, Gibson's machine hiding snake oil is little more than security theater designed to dupe the masses. Nonexistent machines don't eat packets, something actually SAYS they're not there. So when packets magically disappear it's a sure sign there's a machine at that IP address. And one owned by a noob at that. > There's a VERY BIG point to hiding your IP and not exposing it and I > can't believe you don't think so... I can't believe there's still people out there who are so willing to swallow whatever bile a media whore like Gibson vomits up. > How do you think people get hacked and what you don't think boxes > don't get hacked anymore? Of course they do... Actually, port hacking like you're describing accounts for almost ZERO successful attacks. But don't let little things like facts bother you. [...] > Maybe because you used the word HOME user you think that this makes it > ok and it is good enough? Yes for a lot of average users that may be > true, but in todays world with all the changes over the past 20 years > I don't believe as a Tech that the Windows firewall is good enough > anymore... It's fine, as software firewalls go. It's also completely unnecessary in modern times with modern equipment. I don't think there's an off the shelf router on the market that doesn't include a firewall these days. That and NAT alone make your machine completely invisible to the outside. > > Even for Grandma just surfing the web and emailing the grandchildern, > her box can be hacked and used to commit crimes, so in that sense, no > it's not just as good as it gets... Things like "stealth" aren't just not good enough, or "good as it gets", they're worse than doing nothing in a lot of scenarios. And completely meaningless in the rest. |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Is this a local anonymous class or a member anonymous class | Reporter | Java | 3 | 05-12-2007 05:23 AM |
| Firefighters at the site of WTC7 "Move away the building is going to blow up, get back the building is going to blow up." | Midex | Python | 24 | 05-07-2007 04:23 AM |
| Going from anonymous security to Windows Security in an ASP.NET application | Michael Randrup | ASP .Net Security | 3 | 03-27-2006 09:18 PM |
| help with an anonymous array of anonymous hashes | noeldamonmiller@gmail.com | Perl Misc | 1 | 02-10-2005 01:08 AM |
| floppy drive just keeps on going and going and ... | Weylon Bulloch | Computer Support | 1 | 09-07-2003 07:17 AM |
