Wireshark-dev: [Wireshark-dev] [Full-disclosure] SniffJoke 0.3 release and request for feedback
From: Joerg Mayer <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 15:53:05 +0200
Should it be considered a bug if WS can be fooled by a tool like Sniffjoke
to incorrectly reassemble a TCP stream?
The webpage has two sample traces that seem to be handeled incorrectly by
HEAD indeed.

----- Forwarded message from vecna <[email protected]> -----

Delivered-To: [email protected]
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:27:39 +0200
From: vecna <[email protected]>
Organization: SALVIA & MENTA, azione TOTALE, aiuta a prevenire placca, carie
	e disturbi gengivali.
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Full-disclosure] SniffJoke 0.3 release and request for feedback
Errors-To: [email protected]

Some days ago I've relased this:

SniffJoke is a "connection scrambler" for Linux with the purpose of
preventing packet sniffers from reassemble network sessions of the user.
The "sniffer evasion" technology is well known since almost 10 years.
SniffJoke implements the most efficents techniques. Using a local fake
tunnel it is able to manage outgoing and ingoing packets without
disturbing the kernel. With the local web interface the user can easily
start/stop and configure SniffJoke. At the moment, Wireshark, the most
famous packet analyzer, is unable to correctly reconstruct TCP flow
mangled by SniffJoke. I would like to update the list of victim
sniffers, so please send me a report if you test SniffJoke with other
network protocol analyzers.


Any comments appreciate


Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

----- End forwarded message -----

Joerg Mayer                                           <[email protected]>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.