decepticon_eazy_e

I passed it about 3 years ago. There's some very good tutorials out there, but you need to go through the classes. If you don't, you need to buy some routers and switches. Unlike other tests, with 60-80 possible questions, you can't memorize and cheat this one. There's over 800 possible questions with router simulations that can't be memorized. You gotta know your stuff. Take classes, read books, do labs. Take the test and fail, then you'll know where your weak points are. Schedule your second exam about a month after your first, do that ahead of time. After you fail, you have to wait a period before you can re-register, so if you did it ahead of time, you're good to go. If you pass, just cancel the other and get a refund.

The Ubuntu Install disk works better.

Yes, please give us details and we'll nitpick and argue over the best solutions. That's what we do here! OS? Multiple computers? Gaming system? Wireless? Network Devices? Modem? Broadband type? etc..

I can tell you that the 2wire routers in my townhome complex have not been fixed yet!

It's possible and it's been done, I agree it's probably unlikely you or I will be the victim of such an attack. If the router/firewall doesn't do any packet inspection, the packets get passed through if they match the appropriate conditions. If you can guess those conditions, you probably have a better chance at getting through. It's just naive to tell somebody that a netgear router doing NAT is the equivalent of a firewall. I understand that the start of this discussion was somebody using Smoothwall, which probably does packet inspection, so I'm not knocking that, but it might be configured to do so in that example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP_Sequence_Prediction_Attack http://www.tech-faq.com/tcp-sequence-prediction.shtml Somebody would have to be pretty dedicated and knowledgeable to accomplish such a feat with a specific goal in mind, who would do such a thing? http://www.networkcomputing.com/unixworld/...ty/001.txt.html Mitnick did it.

The VPN configuration will define if that is even possible. If they configured it to do so, then (I feel) they are giving you their blessing. If it's configured for "split-tunnel", they won't allow all your traffic inbound. They will only allow traffic bound for their internal network.

I meant in the context of TCP sequence numbers on the outgoing packets, if you can predict them, you can punch a hole in the NAT "firewall" and go right in. A device that performs packet inspection would be an appropriate firewall. NAT is good for home networks, but don't get a false sense of security by calling it a firewall.

Instead of arguing about the validity of the question, the submitter should have just googled it. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=silent+remote+install+of+VNC In our techy computer-nerd world, the answer to the question of "how do you xyz?" or "why do you want to xyz?" is always "because I can". That is the second most common answer to these questions, next to "42". Enough with the moral arguments.

I figured that, but let's not get in the habit of calling a NAT device a firewall. NAT is not an acceptable method of firewalling for security, it's for convenience.

Yup, the UK allows high encryption, no problems there. Cisco defines high encryption as AES or 3DES. There are a few countries that prohibit the use (or at least the import) of devices or software that uses high encryption. That's why AES/3DES isn't activated on a Cisco devices by default, it's an option. There are part numbers for the firewalls that don't allow the upgrade to use AES/3DES. It's all for government compliance junk. http://www.cisco.com/wwl/export/crypto/ Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Sudan and Syria do not. Either they don't allow it or we don't allow it, whichever. I believe the biggest reason is we don't want to supply those countries with devices we can't crack, although the government would never admit that motive. Perhaps the enforcement actually comes from the government of those countries themselves, so they can monitor their people easier. Maybe someone has more insight into that reasoning?

"The LAN can talk to the WIFI, but not the other way around." How did you configure 1 way packet exchange? ('exchange' is used for lack of a better word, since there would be no actual exchange) TCP transactions need to make round trips, hence both networks need permission to talk to each other. Either they can both talk to each other, or they cannot.

Awesome quote! T o o M a n y S e c r e t s.........

1. If your router/modem thing has it, you'll see an option in the GUI. I doubt it's there. Use 2 APs instead. 2. The sysadmin here says get a cisco switch. You'll pay a ton for it, especially gigabit, compared to dlink/netgear/junk. The more ram and higher CPU will give you better numbers, it's going to be hard to find the specs for consumer grade switches. 3. If it's HDMI on both, it'll probably look the same on both. They're both gaming systems, treat them as such, this is the equivalent of asking which cell phone has a better camera and basing your decision on that. 4. Then I would say no, I like the advanced options that you get. But that's just me. 5+. Nothing is easier using Dlink. :) You are looking for enterprise features in consumer grade equipment, there's a reason that this stuff costs so much less.

Ok I'll give this a shot.... 1. Use that router/firewall as your gateway to the internal network. There is no way to keep the wifi traffic off the LAN unless you have some advanced ACLs or packet filtering going on, which I doubt your 2Wire router does. If you lock down your 610N properly, you should be fine. 2. Define "good switch"? Do you need it to do vlans? If you want an unmanaged gigabit switch for a network of this size, just go with what fits your budget. They're all the same at that level. Honestly, you won't be putting enough stress on the switch to see the flaws, if any. 3. Depends on what you want to watch. Do they play all the file formats you want? I like XBMC but I have to make sure to get the appropriate formats supported for that. It's all up to your tastes. 4. Each vendor has a different implementation of N (almost), so we'll have to just sit back and wait until N is final, so I make no judgments there. My opinion is the best router is one that can run custom firmware like DD-WRT or Tomato. 5. Again, depends on the capabilities of the specific equipment. I doubt consumer grade equipment can make dedicated SSIDs tied to a specific vlan. Put an AP outside your firewall and you'll be fine. You might get your bandwidth sapped, but that's another issue. Home networks are a different breed altogether, you don't need to take into considerations things that you do in enterprise networks. They don't have the same requirements or considerations. You really don't need gigabit and when you are all done, if you measure your bandwidth, I would be surprised if you went over 100Mbps between PCs streaming. The software will be your bottleneck.

AES does not have a back door. The algorithm is published and if you like math, you can do the encryption by hand with a calculator if you like. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Encryption_Standard Nobody (with a brain) uses encryption algorithms th

AES does not have a back door. The algorithm is published and if you like math, you can do the encryption by hand with a calculator if you like. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Encryption_Standard Nobody (with a brain) uses encryption algorithms that are not published/open source because of the fear of back doors. There are plenty of other encryption methods out there you can use, they're not as widely supported or easy to implement as AES, but they are there for your enjoyment. Now if the government had a computer big enough to brute force any AES encryption level... that might be possible, every code is brute force-able, it's just a matter of time vs computation speed. That would also be something they would want to keep quiet.

Rainbow tables that work are not small. You can reduce the size if you already know what SSID you are attacking. There was a pretty good thread here already about the individual tables for each SSID, just search for that. If you SSID is not in that list, then look up how to create one because that's all you're going to get.

http://www.vmware.com/resources/compatibil...Category=server I'm not even going to look at the list for a video capture card, because I'm pretty sure it's not there. Video functions and vmware aren't going coexist for a long time, it's not in vmware's interest to write drivers for high end video devices.

http://communities.vmware.com/message/1145...0157A49655D7235 They discuss the problem in this forum, there's a link in one of the posts to the download from a 3rd party site, trust that if you want. You could try going in via SSH and seeing if the file is there, you could copy it via SCP. This may be a symptom of a more serious problem, so you may want to dig further or reinstall.

Are you talking about ESX3i or ESX 3.5? There is no ESXi 3.5 You should be able to go to https://x.x.x.x/client/VMware-viclient.exe and pull down your own client. (URL is from ESX3.5 server here) 1. Don't know, ours works. 2. Unlikely, the install should fail before a file location failed. 3. They're all the same, so yes you can use somebody else's It's also windows only, so I notice you used a Mac there, there's no Mac version.

DarkTangent's keynote speech should be pretty interesting now! I'm even more excited to go!

Anything the OEM manufacturer installs beyond Windows and the appropriate drivers should be labeled bloatware. If it doesn't come on the windows CD and it's not there to enable unique hardware, you don't have a clean install. Bloatware is the correct term in my opinion.

Sorry, the question mark at the end of your sentence made me think you were asking.

Get admin privileges. Also, lose the bet. Do you have access to the explorer? My Computer? type in the URL and go. Open up a saved shortcut?

http://www.mini-itx.com/store/?c=3 Cases, you just need to look around the site.