nanog mailing list archives
Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years?
From: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 18:58:35 -0400
Mike Lewinski wrote:
The TCP/IP stack in Windows XP is broken in this regard, possibly in Vista as well, though I've yet to have the displeasure of finding out.A co-worker confirms that his Vista SP1 can access our .255 router via SSH.
Aww, that's too bad. I've long enjoyed setting loopback and other internal device addresses to .255 -- it drastically reduced some attacks, and made security by obscurity work better. Not that I recommend obscurity as the only security. ;-)
Current thread:
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years?, (continued)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? David Andersen (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Peter Dambier (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Kameron Gasso (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Mark Smith (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Tim Durack (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? David Coulson (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Mike Lewinski (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? William Allen Simpson (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Jared (Jun 13)
- Re: .255 addresses still not usable after all these years? Greg VILLAIN (Jun 14)