 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> The Internet gateway is a Cisco router. I don't have the password -
>> and frankly, if I did I wouldn't know what to do with it.
>
>
> How many physical connections from your internal network to your
> internet gateway - the Cisco router?
Just one.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> The Internet gateway is a Cisco router. I don't have the password -
>>> and frankly, if I did I wouldn't know what to do with it.
>>
>>
>> How many physical connections from your internal network to your
>> internet gateway - the Cisco router?
>
> Just one.
>
Get an old hub and put on the line.
then run a patch from hub to a computer running a packet sniffer
current hookup
SWITCH-----------------------CISCO ROUTER
sniffer hookup
SWITCH------------HUB------------CISCO ROUTER
!
!
SNIFFER
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Tom Austin wrote:
> Get an old hub and put on the line.
>
> then run a patch from hub to a computer running a packet sniffer
If I ever get keen enough, this is the way to solve it.
For now, I'm not that bothered. ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> The Internet gateway is a Cisco router. I don't have the password -
>>>> and frankly, if I did I wouldn't know what to do with it.
>>>
>>>
>>> How many physical connections from your internal network to your
>>> internet gateway - the Cisco router?
>>
>> Just one.
>>
>
> Get an old hub and put on the line.
>
> then run a patch from hub to a computer running a packet sniffer
>
>
>
>
> current hookup
>
> SWITCH-----------------------CISCO ROUTER
>
>
> sniffer hookup
>
> SWITCH------------HUB------------CISCO ROUTER
> !
> !
> SNIFFER
>
>
>
Be sure to put a cross-over cable between the hub and the switch!
This being said, unless Andrew doesn't care about his job, I wouldn't
recommend playing around with the network like that.
Problem 1: Both the switch and router are probably set to full duplex.
If the sniffer or hub sends packets, it may cause collisions that
would look very suspicious on a full duplex link (I'm assuming that one
of the reasons to go to Cisco hardware 2 years ago was for remote
management)
Problem 2: If they are serious about security, the switch will be
configured to allow only one mac address (the router's) and any packet
transmitted by the sniffer PC or hub would cause the port to alarm or
shutdown.
Problem 3: the unpluging of the router and connection to the hub might
be enough to send an alert to the Powers-That-Be(tm).
Chances are they already have network usage stats anyway.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque nous illumina en ce 2008-09-20 14:45 -->
> Tom Austin a écrit :
>> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>>> The Internet gateway is a Cisco router. I don't have the password -
>>>>> and frankly, if I did I wouldn't know what to do with it.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> How many physical connections from your internal network to your
>>>> internet gateway - the Cisco router?
>>>
>>> Just one.
>>>
>>
>> Get an old hub and put on the line.
>>
>> then run a patch from hub to a computer running a packet sniffer
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> current hookup
>>
>> SWITCH-----------------------CISCO ROUTER
>>
>>
>> sniffer hookup
>>
>> SWITCH------------HUB------------CISCO ROUTER
>> !
>> !
>> SNIFFER
>>
>>
>>
>
> Be sure to put a cross-over cable between the hub and the switch!
>
> This being said, unless Andrew doesn't care about his job, I wouldn't
> recommend playing around with the network like that.
>
> Problem 1: Both the switch and router are probably set to full duplex.
> If the sniffer or hub sends packets, it may cause collisions that
> would look very suspicious on a full duplex link (I'm assuming that one
> of the reasons to go to Cisco hardware 2 years ago was for remote
> management)
>
> Problem 2: If they are serious about security, the switch will be
> configured to allow only one mac address (the router's) and any packet
> transmitted by the sniffer PC or hub would cause the port to alarm or
> shutdown.
>
> Problem 3: the unpluging of the router and connection to the hub might
> be enough to send an alert to the Powers-That-Be(tm).
>
> Chances are they already have network usage stats anyway.
>
Normaly, when you use a hub, switch or router, you don't need a crossover cable.
The crossover is done by the hub/switch/router. Crossover cables are used to
dirrectly connect 2 computer by an ethernet cable.
--
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
You know you have been raytracing for too long when the animation you render
will be finished after yourself.
Urs Holzer
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Alain a écrit :
> Francois Labreque nous illumina en ce 2008-09-20 14:45 -->
>> Tom Austin a écrit :
>>> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>>>> The Internet gateway is a Cisco router. I don't have the password
>>>>>> - and frankly, if I did I wouldn't know what to do with it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How many physical connections from your internal network to your
>>>>> internet gateway - the Cisco router?
>>>>
>>>> Just one.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Get an old hub and put on the line.
>>>
>>> then run a patch from hub to a computer running a packet sniffer
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> current hookup
>>>
>>> SWITCH-----------------------CISCO ROUTER
>>>
>>>
>>> sniffer hookup
>>>
>>> SWITCH------------HUB------------CISCO ROUTER
>>> !
>>> !
>>> SNIFFER
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Be sure to put a cross-over cable between the hub and the switch!
>>
>> This being said, unless Andrew doesn't care about his job, I wouldn't
>> recommend playing around with the network like that.
>>
>> Problem 1: Both the switch and router are probably set to full
>> duplex. If the sniffer or hub sends packets, it may cause
>> collisions that would look very suspicious on a full duplex link (I'm
>> assuming that one of the reasons to go to Cisco hardware 2 years ago
>> was for remote management)
>>
>> Problem 2: If they are serious about security, the switch will be
>> configured to allow only one mac address (the router's) and any packet
>> transmitted by the sniffer PC or hub would cause the port to alarm or
>> shutdown.
>>
>> Problem 3: the unpluging of the router and connection to the hub might
>> be enough to send an alert to the Powers-That-Be(tm).
>>
>> Chances are they already have network usage stats anyway.
>>
> Normaly, when you use a hub, switch or router, you don't need a
> crossover cable. The crossover is done by the hub/switch/router.
> Crossover cables are used to dirrectly connect 2 computer by an ethernet
> cable.
>
Cisco Catalyst switches - which is want Andrew said they were installing
in his office a few years ago - do not do that as they expect whoever
installs them to know what they are doing and cable the things through a
cable-management plant where punching down straight-through or
cross-over connections offers more flexibility.
Auto-MDI/MDIX hubs and switches are for home offices where people
usually do not have extra cables lying around, or do not even know the
difference.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Francois Labreque wrote:
> Be sure to put a cross-over cable between the hub and the switch!
>
> This being said, unless Andrew doesn't care about his job, I wouldn't
> recommend playing around with the network like that.
>
> Problem 1: Both the switch and router are probably set to full duplex.
> If the sniffer or hub sends packets, it may cause collisions that
> would look very suspicious on a full duplex link (I'm assuming that one
> of the reasons to go to Cisco hardware 2 years ago was for remote
> management)
>
IIRC it is possible to sniff invisibly (not a pun). Somewhere at home I
have the Snort Cookbook and I'm sure it has a description of how to do
it. I'll post here if I ever find it amongst the couple of thousand
books we have at home.
John
--
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Doctor John wrote:
> Francois Labreque wrote:
>> Be sure to put a cross-over cable between the hub and the switch!
>>
>> This being said, unless Andrew doesn't care about his job, I wouldn't
>> recommend playing around with the network like that.
>>
>> Problem 1: Both the switch and router are probably set to full
>> duplex. If the sniffer or hub sends packets, it may cause
>> collisions that would look very suspicious on a full duplex link (I'm
>> assuming that one of the reasons to go to Cisco hardware 2 years ago
>> was for remote management)
>>
> IIRC it is possible to sniff invisibly (not a pun). Somewhere at home I
> have the Snort Cookbook and I'm sure it has a description of how to do
> it. I'll post here if I ever find it amongst the couple of thousand
> books we have at home.
>
> John
http://www.snort.org/docs/tap/
Not quite what I was looking for, but this might work
John
--
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Francois Labreque wrote:
>>
> IIRC it is possible to sniff invisibly (not a pun).
There are many ways it can be done. I was just saying that playing in
the wiring closet when you're not supposed to can get you fired.
--
/*Francois Labreque*/#local a=x+y;#local b=x+a;#local c=a+b;#macro P(F//
/* flabreque */L)polygon{5,F,F+z,L+z,L,F pigment{rgb 9}}#end union
/* @ */{P(0,a)P(a,b)P(b,c)P(2*a,2*b)P(2*b,b+c)P(b+c,<2,3>)
/* gmail.com */}camera{orthographic location<6,1.25,-6>look_at a }
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
