Again,
I will get on my soapbox and state that any producer of Site Blocking
software should account for all types of URL literals etc, that WWW
producers of bad sites may possibly use to get around the currently
available software.
What does this mean??
It means that software developers like Elron better get a move on, and
start producing real strong software that has a good licensing/IP address
program for large sites who have lots of Class 'A's, Class 'B's, and Class
'C's.. takes into account different organizations etc, etc. Instead of
making press releases, start producing quality software that does not look
like goofy Traffic lights. and has rudimentary reporting HTML reports.
Invest some money in InstallShield 6.1 Professional for NT, InstallShield
for Java for Solaris, Veritas Crystal Reports, a decent database backend
with hooks that allow updates to be passed over TCP through security
devices.
The Internet has given a new name to development. Internet Development,
where hardware is designed 3 months ahead of market with lots of research
and development on the backend. Software companies have half that time,
even a smaller time frame for companies producing URL Blocking software,
the Internet changes in the blink of an eye and so does user preferences..
/mark
"mouss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
03/15/00 05:14 PM
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "mouss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: Speaking of blocking porn...
URLs and other web stuff may be encoded using '%' signs. so "%2e" is '.',
"%77" is 'w', thus "%77%77%77" is "www". you can even mix things, so
"%77w%77" is also "www".
to decode the stuff, you can use perl functions generally found in
CGI-scripting module/libs.
search for URLdecode or something like that, then to decode a "cryptic"
url,
replace '@' by '\@'
(cos' perl no more accepts unescaped '@' in strings) and print the result
of
URLdecode($string).
you can certainly do that in other languages, but perl is just that
handy...
(what? no perl on the firewall? you're kidding? why not a firewall without
a
kernel. that would be
really secure, no? ;-}).
note that you can let your browser do part (or all) of the work for you:
just click on the url and see which site it is contacting. however, this
is
not the safest method...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Micheal Espinola Jr [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 7:14 PM
> To: mouss; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Speaking of blocking porn...
>
>
> What are you (or others on this list) using to reformat cryptic
> IP addresses
> such as these? Is there a program to automate this, or is there a
> mathematical formula?
>
> | -----Original Message-----
> | From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of mouss
> | Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 8:37 AM
> | To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> | Subject: Re: Speaking of blocking porn...
> |
> | actually it matches the format http://user:password@ipaddress
> | where ip address is 374393, which in quad-dots is 0.5.182.121
(because
> | 121+256*182+256*256*5 = 374393. however, 0.5.182.121 is a "reserved"
> | address.
> | so you should get nothing by trying to get the URL above.
>
>
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
