full-disclosure - Re: A new TCP/IP blind data injection technique?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

From: lcamtuf at ghettot.org (Michal Zalewski)
Subject: Re: A new TCP/IP blind data injection technique?

> I suspect that in these cases the RSTs may be coming from firewalls
> rather than end-hosts.  It would be more impressive and surprising if
> one ever got a SYN-ACK in response.

Not really. A variant of the same test addressed to common ports such as
139 resulted in four SYN+ACKs coming back, compared to 50 SYN+ACKs when
the checksum was correct - which is roughly similar to the previous
figure. Quite surprisingly, some of this comes from what seems to be
Windows XP SP1 - but maybe an intermediate device rewrites the packet
instead.

-- 
------------------------- bash$ :(){ :|:&};: --
 Michal Zalewski * [http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx]
    Did you know that clones never use mirrors?
--------------------------- 2003-12-12 18:18 --

   http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/photo/current/