 |
Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com "THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in|
The time now is Wed 22 May 2013, 05:49 All times are UTC - 4 |
 Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Security |
|
Yet another communication protocol
|
 
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Page 1 of 1 [5 Posts] |
| Author | Message | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
nooby
Joined: 29 Jun 2008 Posts: 9386 Location: SwedenEurope |
Doesn't use tcp/ip for internet. I don't intend this as spam but I guess competing companies say I single out just them and not write general enough about the solution they make use of.
works in linux too they say. http://www.iocellnetworks.com/solutions/ndas.php NDAS has its own proprietary protocol and does not use TCP/IP I wonder if my ISP would think that is a suspect thing to do. Their filters suddenly get aware of that I send out packages that has an unknown protocol. What would they do? shut me down for violating the agreement of the account? I am so naive when it comes to computers. I thought that if one don't use the agreed upon protocol would the ISP even allow the traffic to go out? All their alarm bells would ring and flash Spy traffic or something _________________ I'm a noob so I use Google Search of Puppy Forum |
||||
|
|||||
 |
|||||
|
Flash
Official Dog Handler  Joined: 04 May 2005 Posts: 9846 Location: Arizona USA |
This is known as security by obscurity. It might work for a while, but how long? Eventually someone will reverse engineer it, sneak in and kill all your d00ds. 
|
||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
DMcCunney
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 Posts: 894 |
Maybe, maybe not. While TCP-IP is largely the standard networking protocol these days, others did and do exist. Microsoft had one used in their early MS-DOS networking. Novell had IPX/SPX, which are still supported as options in Windows. (A tech friend uses them when he needs to get printers attached to a network.) Apple had AppleTalk. Microsoft uses the SMB protocol for Microsoft Networking, and the open source Samba package allows *nix boxes to speak SMB and be seen as peers on and even domain controllers for Microsoft networks. There's no reason why someone shouldn't come up with a proprietary protocol for attaching network storage devices, for increased performance as well as security. Is it secure? Pretty much, I think. You need their proprietary drivers loaded to even see their network, and they implement security within it so even if you have the drivers, you still need authorization to attach to resources in it. If you have the network analyzer hardware, you can capture traffic and try to reverse engineer and decode their stuff, but that requires you to be able to tap the network to do the capture. NDAS is implemented over ethernet, which means physical cables, not wireless, so you need physical access to the network. If the bad guys have that, you have far bigger problems than whethjer they can reverse engineer a proprietary protocol. ______ Dennis |
||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
efiguy
 Joined: 06 Sep 2006 Posts: 169 |
Nooby, Chase info on these protocals for a better understanding: AoE - ATA on Ethernet disk related LPX - Lean Packet Exchange NDS - Novell Directory SMB - Samba - btw another Australian invention ;) around '93 Most of the methods use special drivers to interface Ethernet hardware layers of an "intranet" and transmit information (specifically Ethernet Frames), in the early days speed was not great about 10 - 11 Mb sec, and they of course were not TCP/IP routable, And As Flash states - security by obscurity to outsiders, Not sure about on "intranet" - probabaly anybody on that ethernet could probe data with a little assembly lang - most driver authors would do an "exclusive OR" logic combination to avoid "casual text program data observation" because it is easy with low throughput impact. Pizzasgood - has a swell write-up on that method within Security. Most data within an ethernet format can be "Encapsalated" in TCP/IP and placed in Internet format - making that data routable to modern means. Encapsulation can include any form of encryption as a seperate process. BTW - DMc - Have followed threads of your very eloquent recent posts with much interest. Had a minor comment toward some of the topics you spoke of in Suggestions about ROX. Thanks Jay |
||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
DMcCunney
Joined: 02 Feb 2009 Posts: 894 |
Thanks, though I'm not sure which posts those were. I use Xfce4 as my normal desktop environment in Puppy and Ubuntu, spend most time in either Thunar or Xfe, and seldom actually use ROX. I don't recall participating in any threads about it. ______ Dennis |
||||
|
|||||
|
|||||
Yet another communication protocol
| Page 1 of 1 [5 Posts] |
|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
|
Forum index » Off-Topic Area » Security |
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum |
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group