100% Private Proxies – Fast, Anonymous, Quality, Unlimited USA Private Proxy!
Get your private proxies now!
I’ve been interested in message tracing, so I played a bit with Cisco’s Packet Tracer and Wireshark.
Is it possible to locate the destination of a message (packages) been sent via WhatsApp? I am not trying to read data out of the packages, I just wonder if it is possible to trace the destination location of the message which has been received.
I want to set up a destination goal in GA to determine when a user reaches the end of a flow, or basically has completed a process.
The problem, the URL changes depending on the activity of the user so we have a URL like this (below) which can vary.
apply/UserAccount?execution=e1s2
The S2 represents the last stage in the flow, which is the page I’m trying to capture. However the e1 could be any number depending on the other activities of the user.
Can someone help with writing a Regex to make sure GA captures the every time a user reaches the last page regardless of the execution number? Is there a way to ignore the “E1” value and simply match the rest? I am completely new to this part so I’d be embarrassed to share what I’ve tried 🙂
The problem of finding the longest path in a graph is known to be not be possible in polynomial time, that I am aware of. I am also aware that using DFS or BFS can give the shortest distance between a given origin and destination in a graph. Is it possible to find a longest path from a source vertex to a destination vertex in polynomial time?
Five Tuple Identifier of TCP connection is (TCP, local IP, local port, remote IP, remote port).
I have made 3 computers in virtual box and set BOX1 for client, BOX2 for median, and BOX3 for server. And made interfaces between them to communicate.
So I have executed the server program on BOX3 and client program in BOX1. The client program calls 10.0.2.2.
When I captured packets from BOX1 and BOX3, the IP Source and Destination IP address was like this.
BOX1's SYN Src : 10.0.1.2 Dest : 10.0.2.2 BOX3's SYN Src : 10.0.1.2 Dest : 10.0.2.2 What I have thought is that in BOX1, Src must be 10.0.1.2 and Dest must be 10.0.1.1. And in BOX3, it must be 10.0.2.1 for Src and 10.0.2.2 for Dest. Because BOX1 communicates with BOX2 and BOX3 commuicates with BOX2.
Why does IP is like that?
Thanks for your help.
I understand that the SameSite directive tries to protect against cross-origin leakages and CSRFs (see OWASP), but I don’t get why (on my browser at least) it applies to the cookie’s destination rather than on the client’s origin. As a consequence of that choice, it is impossible to benefit from SameSite protection in legitimate cross-origin scenarios.
Let’s say I host some API on https://API and some front-end application on https://FRONT:
+----------+ +----------+ | FRONT | | API | |----------| |----------| | | | | | 1 +---------------OPTIONS-/login---------------------> | | | | | | <----------200--Allow-Origin:-FRONT----------------+ 2 | | | | | | 3 ----------------POST-/login------------------------| | | | | | | <-------201-Set-Cookie:-AccessToken:-sk_123--------+ 4 | | | HttpOnly;Secure; | | | | SameSite: Strict | | | | | | | 5 +---------------POST-/protected--------------------> | | | | | | <----------------403-Forbidden---------------------+ 6 | +----------+ +----------+ In this scenario, my user-agent just ignores the Set-Cookie directive (4). But since the Set-Cookie directive took place while the client was on FRONT, I would have expected it to work. I thought “SameSite” cookie meant “The client was on the same site when the cookie was set and when the cross-origin request was made” which makes a lot of sense from the user’s perspective. But it rather means “The cookie was set on the same site it’s being requested from”. Consequently, in this scenario, you have to set SameSite value to None (otherwise, it’s just dropped) and fallback to the good old “manual” CSRF protection mechanism.
My question is: is there any upside of the current implementation of the SameSite directive from a security standpoint? Would a UA that had implemented the SameSite directive the way I thought it worked be vulnerable to some kind of attacks? Is there any chance that we see some kind of Strict+SameOrigin value for SameSite directive someday?
Thanks.
I am new to networking and packet sniffing. I have wireshark installed on my ubuntu machine. I am capturing packets but they all have 802.11 as protocol and Broadcast destination. I have enabled promiscuous mode and I set my network interface to monitor mode using airmon-ng check kill and then airmon-ng start wls1. I am listenning on wls1mon on wireshark. I don’t know what is causing this. I also tried to be on the same network as my test PC. But when I do this, I don’t capture packets even though the PC is youtube and having traffic coming over. I tried with tshark and it is the same problem. When I watched some videos on youtube about this, they all captured packets with different protocols. However, I didn’t pay attention wether they were on monitor or managed mode? Can someone please help me? What I am doing wrong?
Hello Everyone, i hope you have a wonderful Sunday. I have a little update for you regarding Project sptfy.com.
It's called "Change your URL Destination". Basically you can now change which playlist, artist, podcats or album all your short urls point to if you have a registered account on the website.
So, If you head over to sptfy.com, register an account. Then you make a short url while you are logged in you on the…
Sptfy.com – Change your URL Destination update
I have dual booted my pc with Ubuntu 18.04 and Windows10. I am having trouble using one of my disk drives. Like whenever I try to used the DATA drive it shows error: The Destination is read-only.
I checked a solution for this and one says to use ntfsfix. Then another says not to use that as it may corrupt the windows file system. Please let me know how to proceed.
The 5th-level spell teleportation circle says:
As you cast the spell, you draw a 10-foot-diameter circle on the ground inscribed with sigils that link your location to a permanent teleportation circle of your choice, whose sigil sequence you know and that is on the same plane of existence as you. A shimmering portal opens within the circle you drew and remains open until the end of your next turn.
[…]
You can create a permanent teleportation circle by casting this spell in the same location every day for one year. You need not use the circle to teleport when you cast the spell in this way.
The teleportation circle you draw seems to be a point of departure only when you cast it. When it’s a permanent teleportation circle, however, it doesn’t mention whether you can use it as a point of departure.
Can permanent teleportation circles only serve as destinations?
When i try to run the following ip6tables command on the Ubuntu 16.04 LTS version of Linux, it shows an error saying the option DADDR --set-addr is an unknown option
sudo ip6tables -t mangle -A INPUT -m dscp --dscp 11 -j DADDR --set-daddr=<ipv6_addr> ip6tables v1.6.0: unknown option “–set-daddr=”
Is there an option in ip6tables to rewrite the Destination IPv6 address for PREROUTING chain?
Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 16.04.6 LTS Release: 16.04 Codename: xenial