Re: Stealth vs. Blocked

From: David (davidwnh@adelphia.net)
Date: 04/12/03 

From: "David" <davidwnh@adelphia.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2003 23:40:00 GMT

Well now we have two (of many) specific reasons for all the nonbelievers to
not only consider using a firewall (or at least cable/dsl router) but also
"stealthing" or dropping packets (or at least limiting or denying specific
ICMP responses).
I think the problem is that "stealthing" is sort of a misnomer since it's
main benefit has very little to do with actually "hiding" your connection.
>
> > I suspect you mean broadcast ICMP echo packets......Hence Smurf attack.
>
> No, I was referring to broadcast UDP packets sent to the "echo" port
> (udp/7). This is one form of the "Fraggle" attack.
>

Relevant Pages

  • Hanging on time out in CIFS
    ... There appears to be a problem with the CIFS VFS. ... The cause is a stealthing firewall ... FIN to end a TCP connection. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: IP GAPPING - Tricky one
    ... There is some disagreement about whether stealthing an IP ... as TCP 80 for a web server, a hacker will know that you have a firewall at ... to the hacker as a RST reset / port closed would be. ... >>not new technology, just a new product. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.security)
  • Re: Is stealth redundant?
    ... a hacker will know quite easily that you have ... > a firewall. ... > response back to a scan on port 80, ... > web site on your computer, the value of stealthing is arguably diminished. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)