1
Networking / Re: Pentesting my DMZ
« on: April 11, 2015, 05:39:41 pm »
m0rph, that's a cute graphic. thanks for the chuckles. i don't get the comment that soho routers do not redistribute connected subnets.
but i think the light is dawning about the actual events occurring in the router. i guess dmz makes a hard and fast connection between the client at the dmz ip and the wan port. I was also looking to see if there were any vulns at this point. IF for example, by sending a malformed packet to a router with dmz enabled, i could get the router to choke and send the packet to a different internal ip, or to all internal ips.
I will hook up an open box to the dmz ip and try the experiment later.
thanks for the cookies btw.
OK. so I hooked up a NAS to the lan at the DMZ ip and scanned the router through the wan port.
Scanning with the command nmap shows
PORT STATE SERVICE
80/tcp open http
139/tcp open netbios-ssn
445/tcp open microsoft-ds
515/tcp open printer
548/tcp open afp
873/tcp open rsync
3689/tcp open rendezvous
6881/tcp open bittorrent-tracker
8080/tcp open http-proxy
8873/tcp open dxspider
9050/tcp open tor-socks
22939/tcp open unknown
Scanning with the command namp -p - shows
PORT STATE SERVICE
80/tcp open http
139/tcp open netbios-ssn
445/tcp open microsoft-ds
515/tcp open printer
548/tcp open afp
873/tcp open rsync
3689/tcp open rendezvous
6881/tcp open bittorrent-tracker
8080/tcp open http-proxy
8873/tcp open dxspider
9050/tcp open tor-socks
22939/tcp open unknown
59822/tcp open unknown
59824/tcp open unknown
Somewhow, I had the bizarre preconception that a router with DMZ enabled would respond with 'all ports open at the DMZ ip' if no device was actually there. In fact, it just says 'nobody home'
Now I just have to figure out why the extra ports are showing up in the second scan.
thanks to everyone who responded.
Staff note: STOP DOUBLE POSTING! Use the modify button if you have more to add and no one has responded yet.
but i think the light is dawning about the actual events occurring in the router. i guess dmz makes a hard and fast connection between the client at the dmz ip and the wan port. I was also looking to see if there were any vulns at this point. IF for example, by sending a malformed packet to a router with dmz enabled, i could get the router to choke and send the packet to a different internal ip, or to all internal ips.
I will hook up an open box to the dmz ip and try the experiment later.
thanks for the cookies btw.
OK. so I hooked up a NAS to the lan at the DMZ ip and scanned the router through the wan port.
Scanning with the command nmap shows
PORT STATE SERVICE
80/tcp open http
139/tcp open netbios-ssn
445/tcp open microsoft-ds
515/tcp open printer
548/tcp open afp
873/tcp open rsync
3689/tcp open rendezvous
6881/tcp open bittorrent-tracker
8080/tcp open http-proxy
8873/tcp open dxspider
9050/tcp open tor-socks
22939/tcp open unknown
Scanning with the command namp -p - shows
PORT STATE SERVICE
80/tcp open http
139/tcp open netbios-ssn
445/tcp open microsoft-ds
515/tcp open printer
548/tcp open afp
873/tcp open rsync
3689/tcp open rendezvous
6881/tcp open bittorrent-tracker
8080/tcp open http-proxy
8873/tcp open dxspider
9050/tcp open tor-socks
22939/tcp open unknown
59822/tcp open unknown
59824/tcp open unknown
Somewhow, I had the bizarre preconception that a router with DMZ enabled would respond with 'all ports open at the DMZ ip' if no device was actually there. In fact, it just says 'nobody home'
Now I just have to figure out why the extra ports are showing up in the second scan.
thanks to everyone who responded.
Staff note: STOP DOUBLE POSTING! Use the modify button if you have more to add and no one has responded yet.