HOW TO: Netcomm NB9WMAXX and Firewall

[Basil Chupin]

On 17/07/10 12:35, Peter Garrett wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jul 2010 00:07:00 +1000
> Basil Chupin<blchupin at iinet.net.au>  wrote:
>
>    
>> If a router doesn't respond to an ICMP ping then it does not exist.
>> Right? Or is this wrong?
>>      
>  From the headers of your mail:
>
>    
>> Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.3]) ([124.171.111.123])
>> 	by outbound.icp-qv1-irony-out6.iinet.net.au with
>> 	ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 16 Jul 2010 22:06:55 +0800
>>      
> So, your IP does indeed exist, regardless of pings, and indeed if
> someone read the headers they would also know the LAN address of your
> machine (192.168.1.3).
>
> If I wanted to know more I could point nmap at your IP and scan to see
> if anything was listening. (I won't, and neither I hope will other
> list members).
>
> The fact that you can or cannot be "pinged" is completely
> irrelevant.
>
> Also, it's worth remarking that disallowing icmp is actually against
> the "RFC" rules (Requests For Comments). So, good Netizens don't block
> pings ;)
>
> grc.com deals in scare-mongering. The "Shields Up" facility is useful,
> but the insistence on so-called "stealth" is nonsense.
>
> Peter
>    
Thanks Peter and Michael. I think I've got the message :-) : nothing is 
sacred or safe on the 'net. And I won't worry about pings nomore... :-) .

BC

-- 
And God created Woman; and to repent He then created Beer.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-au/attachments/20100717/f7bd543a/attachment.htm