Re: Passive OS fingerprinting.

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>]

Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2008 at 04:16:28PM +0200, Patrick McHardy (kaber@trash.net) wrote:
>> I truely hope it will be since I'm working (slowly, as time permits)
>> on the *tables successor that will implement things like this in
>> userspace. Every module we add that adds more complicated logic in
>> the kernel will make adding an iptables compat layer harder.
> 
> It still is very tempting to implement such things as iptables modules.
> For example I consider to create tunnel-like device and iptables target
> to implement ip-over-dns tunnel, and I need iptables extension since I
> only control single machine outside of my ISP which is not firewalled.
> Having new way of writing iptables extensions requires to update
> existing machines, which is not possible frequently
> (like existing enterprise (r) (c) (tm) solutions...)


Yes, I only mean for matching purposes. Target functionality
can usually not be reached through combination.