netdev - Re: Passive OS fingerprinting.

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

Date:	Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:54:12 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Passive OS fingerprinting.

Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 04:16:28PM +0200, Patrick McHardy (kaber@...sh.net) wrote:
>> I truely hope it will be since I'm working (slowly, as time permits)
>> on the *tables successor that will implement things like this in
>> userspace. Every module we add that adds more complicated logic in
>> the kernel will make adding an iptables compat layer harder.
> 
> It still is very tempting to implement such things as iptables modules.
> For example I consider to create tunnel-like device and iptables target
> to implement ip-over-dns tunnel, and I need iptables extension since I
> only control single machine outside of my ISP which is not firewalled.
> Having new way of writing iptables extensions requires to update
> existing machines, which is not possible frequently
> (like existing enterprise (r) (c) (tm) solutions...)


Yes, I only mean for matching purposes. Target functionality
can usually not be reached through combination.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html