Forum Home
Press F1
 
Thread ID: 51824 2004-11-30 21:28:00 Wireless Encryption mentioned in PCW Chilling_Silence (9) Press F1
Post ID Timestamp Content User
298402 2004-12-02 06:30:00 > There will never be a _direct_ connection... run mtr
> on Google.co.nz and it goes through a good 7 or 8
> connections before it gets there.

never is a strong word chill.

Tracing route to jgi.co.nz [10.0.0.80] from 10.2.0.16
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms 10.0.0.80

Trace complete.
george12 (7)
298403 2004-12-02 06:43:00 &gt; And yes, Murray, I was meaning "you" as in you and me
&gt; and the rest of the world in general :-)

Oh goody, thousands will sleep peacefully tonight knowing that :p

Yup locks are for honest people, which doesn't include guvmints and the likes of the entities Graham mentioned, but inviting people in whether you want to or not is a bit too magnanimous.
Murray P (44)
298404 2004-12-02 07:08:00 george12:
I can do the same with my website (www.dimension.net.nz) - But we're talking internet transmissions here dude.... I do that and get about 8 between me and there....

Admittedly I do PC <-> PC transfers encrypted now via ssh ;-)
Instant Messaging is also encrypted with those that matter using Gaim-encyption too!

This world has a false sense of security when it comes to the internet.....

Murray: Inviting who??
Chilling_Silence (9)
298405 2004-12-02 08:10:00 Yeah - while we're on the topic of routes:

Can anybody explain this? -


Tracing route to dimension.net.nz [202.89.35.251] from 10.2.0.17
over a maximum of 30 hops:

1 <1 ms <1 ms <1 ms router1.jgi.co.nz [10.0.0.254]
2 82 ms 93 ms 83 ms 210-55-64-32.adsl.netgate.net.nz [210.55.64.32]
3 82 ms 79 ms 85 ms 192.168.253.1 <---- LOCAL ADDRESS!!!!!
4 65 ms 65 ms 67 ms 202.50.119.153
5 64 ms 71 ms 73 ms a3-0-5.tkcr1.global-gateway.net.nz [202.50.245.106]
6 82 ms 97 ms 95 ms webinternet-dom.tkcr1.global-gateway.net.nz [202.37.246.218]
7 90 ms 81 ms 79 ms fa0-0-0-23.cr01.akl1.maxnet.net.nz [202.89.36.11]
8 88 ms 85 ms 89 ms fa0-0-1-21.ar01.akl1.maxnet.net.nz [202.89.36.21]
9 95 ms 97 ms 93 ms babylon.blakjak.net [202.89.35.251]

Trace complete.

Now why on earth would there be a 192.168.x.x in the middle of an internet route? It pings fine too. But isn't it meant to be private???:|
george12 (7)
298406 2004-12-02 08:58:00 I think you'll find it'll be different if you ping:
ftp.dimension.net.nz
ssh.dimension.net.nz
irc.dimension.net.nz
dyn.dimension.net.nz
www.dimension.net.nz

^^ Those are me - Otherwise Ive got pure dimension.net.nz going to a mates place where he's got slightly tighter security than me ;-)
Chilling_Silence (9)
298407 2004-12-02 09:25:00 &gt; Murray: Inviting who??

Guys in cars with laptops *cough* or grateful, but parsimonious neighbours ;)
Murray P (44)
298408 2004-12-02 09:27:00 Ah yes,

BUT in my understanding, private ranges such as 192.168.x.x are unroutable - therefore I would not expect such IP addresses to be smack-bang in the MIDDLE of a traceroute - let alone being able to ping from a 10.x.x.x network to the middle of the internet.

How is such a thing possible? BTW it is long before the destination, about hop 6 out of 9.
george12 (7)
298409 2004-12-02 22:18:00 george12> How do you do a Trace route in windows xp?, as I will try the same trace as you & see if I get the same thing or not :) stu120404 (268)
298410 2004-12-02 22:28:00 Start -> Run -> "cmd" -> [Enter]

Type: tracert

Cheers
george12 (7)
298411 2004-12-02 22:30:00 Erm. Dumb me.

>tracert www.dimension.net.nz

I get the 192.168.253.1 address on the third hop (2nd not counting my router).
george12 (7)
1 2 3 4