From: cc ie (davidscottmartin@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Feb 02 2005 - 11:57:02 GMT-3
Chuck,
I would have thought the only thing in the packet was the external
address of my CE590 and a dynamic port number, associated with my
session. I had no idea my internal address was also 'hidden' in the
packet.
scary.
dave
On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:44:35 -0600, Church, Chuck <cchurch@netcogov.com> wrote:
> Probably a javascript app running locally is telling them. Or your real
> address is embedded in the data portion of a packet, that the NAT
> process can't change.
>
> Chuck Church
> Lead Design Engineer
> CCIE #8776, MCNE, MCSE
> Netco Government Services - Design & Implementation Team
> 1210 N. Parker Rd.
> Greenville, SC 29609
> Home office: 864-335-9473
> Cell: 703-819-3495
> cchurch@netcogov.com
> PGP key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x4371A48D
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> cc ie
> Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2005 7:55 AM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: internal IP should be hidden ? Shouldn't it ?
>
> My CE590 sits behind my PIX525 which sits behind my 7204VXR.
>
> All port 80 traffic gets redirected into the CE590, 1918 addresses
> gets PAT at the external interface of the cache engine. After which is
> flows through the PIX before it leaves via 7204 out to the ISP.
>
> Diagram:
> INTERNET > 7204VXR > PIX525 > CE590> Switch>LAN> ME :-)
>
> Can somebody please tell me how these guys at auditmypc can sniff my
> internal address ?
> http://www.auditmypc.com/freescan/scanoptions.asp
>
> Dave
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 03 2005 - 08:51:16 GMT-3