• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

safe setup?

D

dud2k

Senior member
hey
do you guys consider the following a safe network setup?

equipment:
2 PC's, both running win2k, one NIC each
one hub
one cable modem- DHCP

setup:
both pc's connect directly to the hub
cable modem connected to uplink of hub

I was once told before that this setup wasnt very safe with having one win98 and one win2k machine. now i have two win2k machines, so would having file and printer sharing be safe?
 
uhm... define safe.

is it hackable? yes.. should it be easy? probably...

if you want file and printer sharing to be safe, then setup a router after the internet connection, then take netbeui out of tcpip and run it on its own... its not routable.

U should alos consider a router with at least a basic firewall and NAT support. Also, install tiny firewall or zonealarm on each machine, make sure its something that monitors output not just input.

will these make U hack proof? no.... but it'll make hacking alot more difficult.

 


<< then take netbeui out of tcpip and run it on its own >>



Perhaps you mean disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP, install NetBEUI and use that as you LAN protocol. NetBEUI is not "in" TCP/IP. It is a seperate transport protocol entirely.

 
so..there is no way to have a secure way to share files/printer with my setup?

so the best solution is to get a reuter?
 
no, I said take netbeui out of tcpip and thats what I meant, if you understood encapsulation then it would make sense.

encapsulating a unroutable protocol inside of a routable one, especially one as inherently unsecure as netbios, is bad mojo.

 
OK. I am certainly not offended by correction. Most of the things I have learned off this board is from an incorrect response on my part. I understand encapsulation to some degree, but certainly no expert. So I went to work with a search engine to see if I could understand better or back up my statement. Plenty of info on NetBIOS over TCP/IP. Same for NetBEUI, as a transmission protocol without a networking layer, thus non-routable. Nothing I could find could explain taking NetBEUI out of TCP/IP. Disabling NetBIOS support? Sure lost of info. Have a website you might could point to with specific information? Only NetBEUI enapsulation information that I could find dealt with VPN tunneling, and not LAN traffic. Anyway, taking NetBEUI out of TCP/IP still doesnt float to me but I am open to lengthy rebuttal with any website, whitepaper, pdf, rfc or whatever you might could send me to.
 
lol, sorry man I'm not using technically correct jargon for it. What it meant was to remove the netbios encapsulation and run it as its own independent protocol. So you'd have tcpip and netbios seperate, that way netbios isnt getting routed (well unless U set that up on your router, of course cisco is the only ones I've seen do this)

Since encapsulation is putting the netbios packet within the tcpip packet I called it "in tcp", so to "take it out of it" meant to remove the ecapsulation settings of the tcpip protocol.

Anyhow, sorry, I should be more technically correct in my explanations, slang makes things difficult...
 
It really wasn't the "in" I had a hard time with. It was the use of NetBEUI instead of NetBIOS. Thanks for clearing that up though. That is was I was saying the whole time. later
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top