Problem with LHOST on exploits.

[professor0110 at gmail.com (Professor 0110)]

Thanks for the quick reply, Tinkerbell. :)

But I'm wondering if its because I'm behind a router that I can't receive a
remote command shell, or it says that the connection timed out.



On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 8:46 AM, tinkerbell tinkerbell
<st1nk3r2 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Try phishing.  Entice to click on loaded link.  Works consistently for
> me, but hinges on egress outbound via your LHOST listener port.  If
> the target sample is big enough and the hook good enough, it can be
> effective.
>
> The bind(2) might ref a process that is hung, even if you've killed
> it.  Try an lsof or netstat -an to see if there is a MS connection
> established.  If so, kill it explicitly.  That might work and is the
> easiest fix, so maybe start there.  Or the IP:port might literally be
> in use by another process, too.
> tk
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Professor 0110 <professor0110 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > You guys have been great. Thanks for patiently answering my [noob]
> > questions. :)
> >
> > One more thing, though.
> >
> > How am I supposed to allow my victim to initiate a connection with me?
> >
> > Also, I receive errors such as these:
> >
> > [*] Handler binding to LHOST 0.0.0.0
> > [-] Bind failed on 0.0.0.0
> > [*] Handler binding to LHOST x.x.x.x (my external IP address)
> > [-] Bind failed on x.x.x.x
> > [-] Exploit failed: Cannot assign requested address - bind(2)
> >
> > Or another one where it says the connection times out to target:port
> >
> > Help on this will be much appreciated. :)
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:29 AM, natron <natron at invisibledenizen.org>
> > wrote:
> > > No.  NAT setups, like what you probably have with a router + broadband
> > > at home, allow you to initiate connections to a routable internet IP
> > > address but do not allow internet IP addresses to initiate connections
> > > with you.
> > >
> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_address_translation
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 2:24 AM, Professor 0110 <
> professor0110 at gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > But if you can connect to the victim via ping or web browser, then
> > > > certainly
> > > > LHOST would be routable from the victim address?
> > > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Patrick Webster <patrick at aushack.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > The LHOST value is what is encoded into the actual shellcode
> payload...
> > > > > So LHOST must be routable from the victim address, assuming it is
> > > > > vulnerable.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > https://mail.metasploit.com/mailman/listinfo/framework
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > https://mail.metasploit.com/mailman/listinfo/framework
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.metasploit.com/pipermail/framework/attachments/20090416/405213e6/attachment.htm>