Security Incidents mailing list archives
Re: Strange traceroute
From: fygrave () EPR0 ORG (CyberPsychotic)
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 13:50:39 +0500
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000 out of nowhere RB spoke: ~:public address shows the 10.76.x.x address as the first hop. I posted it to ~:this security list because it seemed strange that a private IP address would ~:be displayed. I'm not thinking that I was comprimised or under attack, just ~:a little curious. As I mentioned in some of my previous posts, some people use private IP range IP addresses for point-to-point interfaces on multi-homed nodes. While it's not entirely correct (some sort of `ip unnumbered e0` is) it works in most cases and doesn't interfere with anything but traceroute as long as you don't use the node to establish outgoing connections.. -F
Current thread:
- Strange traceroute RB (Feb 02)
- Re: Strange traceroute Bruce A. Mah (Feb 03)
- Re: Strange traceroute Alexandr Kovalenko (Feb 03)
- Re: Strange traceroute Mixter (Feb 08)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Strange traceroute Jacobs, Guy Edward (Feb 03)
- Re: Strange traceroute RB (Feb 03)
- Re: Strange traceroute CyberPsychotic (Feb 05)
- Re: Strange traceroute Dragos Ruiu (Feb 07)
- Private networks and home.{net|com} Etaoin Shrdlu (Feb 07)
- Strange ping reply packets Artur Nowak (Feb 08)
- Re: Private networks and home.{net|com} Bruce A. Mah (Feb 08)
- Re: Private networks and home.{net|com} Dragos Ruiu (Feb 09)
- E-Mail relay or break in? Seth Georgion (Feb 08)
- Re: E-Mail relay or break in? JJ Gray (Feb 09)
- Re: E-Mail relay or break in? Graeme (Feb 09)
- Re: E-Mail relay or break in? Nathan Nichols (Feb 09)
- Re: Strange traceroute CyberPsychotic (Feb 05)
- Re: E-Mail relay or break in? Ryan Russell (Feb 09)