bugtraq - Re: Re: Verified evasion in Snort

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <drvrd1$6tc$1@sea.gmane.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 15:03:53 -0000
From: "Dave Korn" <davek_throwaway@...mail.com>
To: bugtraq@...urityfocus.com
Subject: Re: Re: Verified evasion in Snort


anonpoet@...onnu.isu.edu wrote:


> (Windows boxes don't seem to send out a frag time exceeded on
> anything other than the first fragment.)

  That's what the host requirements RFC demands:  see e.g. 
http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1122.txt

----------------------quote----------------------
 3.2.2 Internet Control Message Protocol -- ICMP

   [ ... snip ... ]

An ICMP error message MUST NOT be sent as the result of
         receiving:

   [ ... snip ... ]

         *    a non-initial fragment, or
----------------------quote----------------------

    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....