Penetration Testing mailing list archives
Re: Traceroute
From: John Galt <everbeeninlove () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2005 07:53:10 +0530
I am not sure about this, but as far as i know, record route is not a mandatory directive according to standards, and routers are free to ignore it. Talking about traceroute, it works by incrementing the ttl by one each time, so that each packet travels one hop further before being dropped and an ICMP message coming back to the sender, right? However, IP itself is designed so that each route is decided when the packet is transmitted, not like in a VC. Thus, does a traceroute like that make much of a sense? Since you never know what route your other packets, or even all packets involved in the trace, took? pray forgive my foolishness everybody! regards John Galt On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:49:03 +0100, Chris <uid0 () free fr> wrote:
Hi, I've just got a little question which isn't really linked to pen-testing: do you know any alternative to the normal UDP/TCP/ICMP traceroute to trace the route of a packet? I'm already aware of the IP Record Route option, but is there any other hack that you guys would be aware of? Thanks. Christian Vincenot -- "Portability is for people who cannot write new programs" -me [Linus Torvalds], right now (with tongue in cheek)
Current thread:
- Traceroute Chris (Feb 24)
- RE: Traceroute rzaluski (Feb 25)
- Re: Traceroute mc (Feb 25)
- Re: Traceroute Chris (Feb 25)
- RE: Traceroute Omar Herrera (Feb 25)
- Re: Traceroute John Galt (Feb 25)
- RE: Traceroute dwarkeeper (Feb 26)