1 |
Okay, many people believe that to hide your computer is good, it is what |
2 |
many Internet security sites say. Could you elaborate on why it isn't |
3 |
good to try to hide your computer. |
4 |
|
5 |
Thanks |
6 |
On Thu, 2004-01-08 at 20:27, Oliver Schad wrote: |
7 |
> Am Donnerstag, 8. Januar 2004 13:06 schrieb mir gonzalo: |
8 |
> > 1/8/04 8:50 AM, Oliver Schad escribio: |
9 |
> > > Am Mittwoch, 7. Januar 2004 23:05 schrieb mir Mark Hurst: |
10 |
> > >> It's much better to have a firewall than just have ports not open. |
11 |
> > >> Even though a port is not open it can reveal the presence of your |
12 |
> > >> machine by the manner in which the IP stack responds to a connection |
13 |
> > >> attempt. Using a firewall you can drop those packets, making all |
14 |
> > >> your closed ports invisible. |
15 |
> > > |
16 |
> > > If you want to invisible, the next router to you have to send an ICMP |
17 |
> > > packet with "host unreachable". If you say nothing anybody with some |
18 |
> > > brain between his ears knows there is a very intelligent guy that |
19 |
> > > want to be invisible. |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > AFAIK they appear as "filtered",that's the difference between a closed |
22 |
> > and a filtered port. The first responds with a "negative", the second |
23 |
> > doesn't respond. Am I wrong? |
24 |
> |
25 |
> That's right. But no answer means there is somebody who doesn't answer. |
26 |
> Only if the last router before the target says "Hey, there is nobody", |
27 |
> then there is nobody (or there is an really intelligent guy, that wants |
28 |
> to hide his host). |
29 |
> |
30 |
> To hide a host is always very stupid, why should you do this? There is no |
31 |
> advantage. If you "hide" your computer an attacker knows there is an |
32 |
> stupid guy who doesn't know anything about network security. |
33 |
> |
34 |
> mfg |
35 |
> Oli |
36 |
> |
37 |
> -- |
38 |
> gentoo-security@g.o mailing list |