SEARCH  

NEWS

2010.10.06:11:36:28
Apple zapłaci 625,5 mln USD za naruszenie patentów?
Sąd uznał winę firmy Stevea Jobsa i nakazał jej wypłatę ogromnego odszkodowania. Ta jednak uważa, że racja jest po jej stronie i zapowiada dalszą walkę.

 

183027014286_522060007368Jay Levitt
On Sunday 11 April 2004 4:56 pm, __ Radien__ wrote: No. TCPwrappers is a response mechanism to see where a connection came from, not a gateway in the middle of a connection between two mach

 
151329284716_522060007784Alistair Tonner
On Sun, 2004-04-11 at 01:38, Jay Levitt wrote: Im occasionally seeing lines like the following, always to the same machine which is on my internal network: Apr 11 01:11:52 linux kernel: Rej

 
132924954174_508360007662Alistair Tonner
On Sun, 2004-04-11 at 01:38, Jay Levitt wrote: Im occasionally seeing lines like the following, always to the same machine which is on my internal network: Apr 11 01:11:52 linux kernel: Rej

 
185226014656_508760007943Antony Stone
hi im not sure if this is the right list to ask this, dont be too harsh one me :~ this is my ipv6 routing table # route -A inet6 -n Kernel IPv6 routing table Destination

 
166823994720_515760007037Antony Stone
hi im not sure if this is the right list to ask this, dont be too harsh one me :~ this is my ipv6 routing table # route -A inet6 -n Kernel IPv6 routing table Destination

 
164421994739_593160007386Antony Stone
On Sun, 2004-04-11 at 02:54, Antony Stone wrote: Can anyone think how I can see the content of packets from a browser running on my machine, which is posting a form back to a remote server some

 
129829324313_501360007762Antony Stone
On Sun, 2004-04-11 at 02:54, Antony Stone wrote: Can anyone think how I can see the content of packets from a browser running on my machine, which is posting a form back to a remote server some

 
179724804257_597260007495Antony Stone
On Sun, Apr 11, 2004 at 01:54:39AM +0100, Antony Stone wrote: I want to pick up a packet stream, but for an HTTPS connection, and using a standard packet sniffer like ethereal just gives me t

 
163324154095_528860007644Antony Stone
On Sun, Apr 11, 2004 at 01:54:39AM +0100, Antony Stone wrote: I want to pick up a packet stream, but for an HTTPS connection, and using a standard packet sniffer like ethereal just gives me t

 
123121704043_595160007412Anupam
On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 20:54, Antony Stone wrote: Hi people. This is not strictly a netfilter question, but Im wondering if maybe someone can help or make a suggestion? I want to pick u

 
198929734611_572860007030Anupam
On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 20:54, Antony Stone wrote: Hi people. This is not strictly a netfilter question, but Im wondering if maybe someone can help or make a suggestion? I want to pick u

 
111322014962_542760007113Philipp Stader

 
118920124593_544760007157Syed Faisal Gillani
Philipp Stader wrote:

 
194226174572_503760007074Nick Pasich
On Sun, 11 Apr 2004, Syed Faisal Gillani wrote: i am a newbie learning iptables ... can u tell me the rule of blocking only ping on my nic ? Hi, try this: iptables -A INPUT -p icmp --icmp-typ

 
168221364245_572560007573Frederic de Villamil
is it possible in iptables to FW a port traffic (eg 80) to an internal = ipaddress of a webserver ? Syed Faisal Gillani ClickOnline Networks clickonlinenetworks.com clickonlinenetworks.com E

 
113720754545_574860007448Jee JZ
is it possible in iptables to FW a port traffic (eg 80) to an internal = ipaddress of a webserver ? Syed Faisal Gillani ClickOnline Networks clickonlinenetworks.com clickonlinenetworks.com

 
177829174649_574060007865Jee JZ
On Saturday 10 April 2004 7:54 pm, Jee J.Z. wrote: Dear all, I am trying to setup three PCs and do some simple filter+nat jobs. The situation is specified below: 1.PC1 has one NIC with a

 
185325334877_544660007861Jee JZ
On Sunday 11 April 2004 12:33 am, Jee J.Z. wrote: Hi Antony, Thanks for getting the spelling right - lots of people round here dont :) Look at the routing table of each machine the packets a

 
160329234477_517560007382Jee JZ
On Sunday 11 April 2004 3:00 am, Jee J.Z. wrote: Heres what I think is going on: PC1 has a simple routing table saying "network 144.32.xxx.0/23 is on eth0, and the deafult gatew

 
124926424518_549560007605Antony Stone

 
106725044681_561360007483Chris Brenton
It happens on many servers, not just sourceforge - in fact, I get it on the netfilter server as well. And its only sometimes for any given server, not all the time... Ill try turning on sendmail lo

 
106020304400_571060007744Ranjeet Shetye
Chris Brenton wrote: On Sat, 2004-04-10 at 14:33, Jay Levitt wrote: sourceforge: [SYN] me: [SYN, ACK] sourceforge: [ACK] [SMTP conversation ensues, switches to TLS, sends me an

 
157526234277_545160007257Antony Stone
Hi all, some of you can give me some input about the best way to set up a vpn under two Linux RH9 systems? I heared there are different solution (PPP and SSH, PPTP...) and Id like to know your opin

 
131226724180_578960007140Antony Stone
Antony Stone wrote:

 
117120964782_568960007149Antony Stone
Hi, I forget one things, waht about the CIPE solution. I read that in the rh9 sec guide about VPN. And then, I see this news: the FreeS/WAN project is no longer in active development, it could b

 
129426594653_597660007906Alexander Samad
Ok, I see. Well, thank you very much for giving me such information and for being so exhaustive. regards Gianni Antony Stone wrote:

 
145823324936_585960007705Scott MacKay
---snip---- Development has moved to openswan I believe openvpm is another good choice for ipsec vpn solution Regards, Antony. -- The difference between theo

 
160226174327_588060007396Dick StPeters
Im afraid I dont have time to answer in depth today but here are a few quick answers regarding *swan: On Mon, 2004-04-12 at 08:25, Scott MacKay wrote: I had a couple questions about the different

 
113723804067_531760007915John A Sullivan III
On Saturday 10 April 2004 11:18, Antony Stone wrote: PPP is Point-to-Point Protocol, and has almost nothing to do with VPNs :) SSH is Secure Shell, and at least it contains some encryption, but

 
145723404010_523960007602Dimitris Kounalakis
lør, 10.04.2004 kl. 14.30 skrev John A. Sullivan III: [...] The closest solution we could find to rival the commercial offerings on such a large scale is netfilter + freeS/WAN + iproute2 +

 
138823234260_504060007533azeem ahmad
On Friday 09 April 2004 12:56 pm, Dimitris Kounalakis wrote: Hello, I need a special case and I am not sure it can exist with NAT (SNAT or DNAT) I have two lan networks with IP range : 1

 
194627574865_588260007908Jeffrey Laramie
On Friday 09 April 2004 11:07 pm, azeem ahmad wrote: hi alll i want to check the logs of iptables to check who is passing throught my machine. so plz tell me where r its logs and how can i che

 
158622174525_591460007593Antony Stone
Dear friends, As I am getting more confused about VPN masq., request your help on this. My local LAN is 10.35.0.0/24 My Linux box running red hat linux 9.0 with kernel 2.4.20-8. acting as the gat

 
130922344974_537760007142Luke Deryckx
yes, you need the pptp patch ive been in the same situation, and applying the patch made it work just fine.- see www.netfilter.org/documentation/HOWTO//netfilter-extensions-HOWTO-5.html#ss5.6

 
129120084483_530260007512Manikandan
When I try to apply the patch, using netfilter CVS I am getting an error like Do you want to apply this patch [N/y/t/f/a/r/b/w/q/?] y Testing patch submitted/03_2.4.21.patch... Failed to patch copy

 
190426354836_516460007134azeem ahmad
On Friday 09 April 2004 12:56 pm, Dimitris Kounalakis wrote: Hello, I need a special case and I am not sure it can exist with NAT (SNAT or DNAT) I have two lan networks with IP range : 1

 
169726214892_556260007507Dave Barnum
On Sunday 25 April 2004 2:11 pm, Manikandan wrote: Somehow I managed to patch my kernel with pptp patch. But everytime when I load modules like ip_conntrack_pptp, ip_nat_pptp, I am getting an er

 
146920884725_599560007822Jeffrey Laramie
On Friday 09 April 2004 11:07 pm, azeem ahmad wrote: hi alll i want to check the logs of iptables to check who is passing throught my machine. so plz tell me where r its logs and how can i che

 
158823124056_556160007607Manikandan
Hi, Is there a patch for the IPSec masquerading for kernel 2.4.x. Basically, I need to allow multiple clients in a private lan access the (IPSec) VPN server through the internet. I hit upon this link

 
170429814616_518660007863Antony Stone
Dear friends, As I am getting more confused about VPN masq., request your help on this. My local LAN is 10.35.0.0/24 My Linux box running red hat linux 9.0 with kernel 2.4.20-8. acting as the gat

 
169921854497_553460007172Luke Deryckx
On Saturday 10 April 2004 6:18 am, Manikandan wrote: When I try to apply the patch, using netfilter CVS I am getting an error like Do you want to apply this patch [N/y/t/f/a/r/b/w/q/?] y T

 
166820464794_555960007296Luke Deryckx
yes, you need the pptp patch ive been in the same situation, and applying the patch made it work just fine.- see www.netfilter.org/documentation/HOWTO//netfilter-extensions-HOWTO-5.html#ss5.6

 
106520774385_579160007387Antony Stone

 
161226594699_566860007388Manikandan
When I try to apply the patch, using netfilter CVS I am getting an error like Do you want to apply this patch [N/y/t/f/a/r/b/w/q/?] y Testing patch submitted/03_2.4.21.patch... Failed to patch copy

 
127529254368_589160007651Antony Stone
No, not using netfilter (unless you wanted to create a rule for each possible destination, just in case some packets got sent there (but then youd want to know what protocol was used, too, so

 
175428094837_525160007186Dave Barnum
On Sunday 25 April 2004 2:11 pm, Manikandan wrote: Somehow I managed to patch my kernel with pptp patch. But everytime when I load modules like ip_conntrack_pptp, ip_nat_pptp, I am getting an er

 
142420104232_521760007841Donovan J Edye
okay ... i decided to try them both ( the rule you posted and snort) to see ... ( one at a time :-) ) i just installed snort but i am stuck in the manual right now ... if it happens to have a snort c

 
151426364918_589960007990Manikandan
Hi, Is there a patch for the IPSec masquerading for kernel 2.4.x. Basically, I need to allow multiple clients in a private lan access the (IPSec) VPN server through the internet. I hit upon this link

 
128520384649_598560007869Roeland Moors
I have the following setup: CAPS = Device / Machine - ROUTER: WAN Address: xxxxxxxxx LAN Address: 192.168.40.1 - IPTABLES: 1 LAN Interface 192.168.40.5 (Gateway: 192.168.40.1) - PROXY: 1 LA

 
137229824793_574160007904Luke Deryckx
On Saturday 10 April 2004 6:18 am, Manikandan wrote: When I try to apply the patch, using netfilter CVS I am getting an error like Do you want to apply this patch [N/y/t/f/a/r/b/w/q/?] y T

 

 

home   |    register   |    login