| 1 |
On 7/6/06, Lord Sauron <lordsauronthegreat@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 7/5/06, Ryan Tandy <tarpman@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Steven Susbauer wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > |
| 5 |
> > > On Wed, 5 Jul 2006, Ryan Tandy wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > |
| 7 |
> > >> Lord Sauron wrote: |
| 8 |
> > >>> If you can, what I'd do is try and get the guy's MAC Address or |
| 9 |
> > >>> something and then totally block that off. That's send him away right |
| 10 |
> > >>> quickly. I don't know enough to know if that'd be totally possible, |
| 11 |
> > >>> but if the guy isn't terribly intelligent, that'll send him packing. |
| 12 |
> > >> net-analyzer/macchanger ;) |
| 13 |
> > >> |
| 14 |
> > > |
| 15 |
> > > What's this? Portage on Windows? |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> > More just to mention that there is such a thing out there. And if it |
| 18 |
> > exists for us, chances are he has a similar tool available. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> However, if you block his mac without an error message, then he can't |
| 21 |
> know how you're identifying him to block him. He probably won't know |
| 22 |
> what to do, and just might give up then. Worth a try, if nothing |
| 23 |
> else. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Yeah, that's pretty much true. For a LAN. Doying it at the Internet |
| 27 |
would most probably blacklist a entire subnet that's routed to you |
| 28 |
with that MAC. So, not worth a try, it would be something more to |
| 29 |
configure, and get you no benefit at all, while risking making your |
| 30 |
machine invisible for people who could use the services you are trying |
| 31 |
to securely provide. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Daniel da Veiga |
| 35 |
Computer Operator - RS - Brazil |
| 36 |
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- |
| 37 |
Version: 3.1 |
| 38 |
GCM/IT/P/O d-? s:- a? C++$ UBLA++ P+ L++ E--- W+++$ N o+ K- w O M- V- |
| 39 |
PS PE Y PGP- t+ 5 X+++ R+* tv b+ DI+++ D+ G+ e h+ r+ y++ |
| 40 |
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ |
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives