1. Open a command prompt
2. Type "netstat -a" (without quotes)
^
This will reveal all your open listening ports (both TCP and UDP) and all associated IP addresses connected to them. If you have a backdoor it will be listed there.
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
If the .gov is doing it they can monitor inbound and outgoing traffic and you'll have no idea as they don't need to be on your computer to do that and Tor won't help you there either.
__________________
This is not a toy. If you break it you will pay for it.
Facebook.com/douglas.mcdonnell.56
www.keezmovies.com
필승 = Pil Seung = Certain Victory
Join the Occupy Pyongyang movement today!
facebook.com/groups/177201785770959/
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
If the .gov is doing it they can monitor inbound and outgoing traffic and you'll have no idea as they don't need to be on your computer to do that and Tor won't help you there either.
I am curious about this..why wouldn't Tor help with this? Is it because the .gov has the tools to simply break the encryption, or are they passively sniffing way before any of that stuff can be encrypted anyways?
We are talking about a government agency, with near unlimited funding to dump into a cyber-surveillance program, potentially monitoring your friend, and you are going to attempt to discover them via netstat -a?
Futility aside, it is highly unlikely that your friend is being monitored by the government. Unless he has been doing something that warrants the time and funds to watch his communications, no one is watching him. Even if he has been involved in some small-time criminal activity, agencies don't keep tabs on small-time.
He sounds to me like just another paranoid who wishes he was a palpable danger to society.
__________________
Woman, I am tending to my musket.
We are talking about a government agency, with near unlimited funding to dump into a cyber-surveillance program, potentially monitoring your friend, and you are going to attempt to discover them via netstat -a? ...
Thing is though, a lot of LE is handled by third-party.. and a lot of those guys are just a bunch of hacks who will most likely try to use various exploits to break into your computer, remotely copy your hard drive contents and your browsing/search history, get all your passwords and usernames, grab all your e-mail databases, cookies, bookmarks, favorites... this tells them A HELL OF A LOT about YOU. And that's just what they want is good ole info on what you are and what you are doing here. Again, LOT'S of these goons are just hacks who know a LOT of tricks. BUT, no matter what they do they have to make a connection of some kind to your box. And that connection SHOULD show up with the netstat -a command. If they're connected to your machine it should display there no matter what. Although, there ARE methods to connect to a port without actually opening it.... but that's another story. The point is, everything helps when you are trying to determine if you have a pack of feds hanging off your ass. Screenshots are good... keep taking them and comparing the IP's and connections... run tracerts and lookups... use NetCat or whatever... you'll be surprised what you discover sometimes.
If the .gov is doing it they can monitor inbound and outgoing traffic and you'll have no idea as they don't need to be on your computer to do that and Tor won't help you there either.
This is exactly what the government would do. They are the government. They're big, they're wasteful, and they're incompetent, but they have power and exercise that power to get others who are not nearly as retarded as they are to do all the heavy lifting.
In other words they'd go to your ISP (AT&T/NSA secret door) and siphon all your traffic that way, and siphon anyone else connecting to that network. They aren't going to waste there time with an individual unless you were a high priority target that would justify wasting countless dollars to monitor a single individual up close and personal.
Anyways monitoring by the government is all about patterns, less about the context. You fall into a pattern you go into a select profile. Fall into the wrong profile and Jack Bauer comes to kick the shit out of you.
__________________
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com
U.S. #1 Financier of Terrorism
SYN scan is another form of TCP scanning. Rather than use the operating system's network functions, the port scanner generates raw IP packets itself, and monitors for responses. This scan type is also known as "half-open scanning", because it never actually opens a full TCP connection. The port scanner generates a SYN packet. If the target port is open, it will respond with a SYN-ACK packet. The scanner host responds with a RST packet, closing the connection before the handshake is completed.[3]
The use of raw networking has several advantages, giving the scanner full control of the packets sent and the timeout for responses, and allowing detailed reporting of the responses. There is debate over which scan is less intrusive on the target host. SYN scan has the advantage that the individual services never actually receive a connection. However, the RST during the handshake can cause problems for some network stacks, in particular simple devices like printers. There are no conclusive arguments either way.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_scanner
A connection can be "half-open", in which case one side has terminated its end, but the other has not. The side that has terminated can no longer send any data into the connection, but the other side can. The terminating side should continue reading the data until the other side terminates as well. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmi...ntrol_Protocol
SYN scan is another form of TCP scanning. Rather than use the operating system's network functions, the port scanner generates raw IP packets itself, and monitors for responses. This scan type is also known as "half-open scanning", because it never actually opens a full TCP connection. The port scanner generates a SYN packet. If the target port is open, it will respond with a SYN-ACK packet. The scanner host responds with a RST packet, closing the connection before the handshake is completed.[3]
The use of raw networking has several advantages, giving the scanner full control of the packets sent and the timeout for responses, and allowing detailed reporting of the responses. There is debate over which scan is less intrusive on the target host. SYN scan has the advantage that the individual services never actually receive a connection. However, the RST during the handshake can cause problems for some network stacks, in particular simple devices like printers. There are no conclusive arguments either way.
source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_scanner
A connection can be "half-open", in which case one side has terminated its end, but the other has not. The side that has terminated can no longer send any data into the connection, but the other side can. The terminating side should continue reading the data until the other side terminates as well. source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmi...ntrol_Protocol
Okay, and this is what you posted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by -SpectraL
Although, there ARE methods to connect to a port without actually opening it.... but that's another story.
You see your mistake? I didn't think so. Let me enlighten you:
A half-open connection does not connect to a port. It is not even a connection. It is the result of a packet hitting a machine and the machine responding with a SYN/ACK or a RST.
A remote machine does not open ports. The only way you can communicate with a machine is via listening ports created by services or daemons on that machine.
The only way you could open a port remotely via a single packet is if you have something listening in the kernel that can catch a packet before the tcp stack does, and have it open that port for you.
An easy way to do this is to have a kernel module utilize netfilter hooks, and from there manipulate the sk_buff as you see fit.
There are two reasons why this is different from what you believe. The first is that this requires kernel level programming and essentially changes how the target machine does business. We are talking about rootkit behavior, and very few of the people on this forum could carry out a programming task like that. The second is because catching a packet as it traverses the tcp stack is not:
Quote:
Originally Posted by -SpectraL
Although, there ARE methods to connect to a port without actually opening it.... but that's another story.
Lastly, don't ever insult my intelligence by parroting wikipedia articles and yahoo answers. I know what I'm talking about, and I know a hell of a lot more than you do.
__________________
Woman, I am tending to my musket.
No, you don't. In truth, you're a technically ignorant moron who hasn't got a fucking clue what he's talking about.
The difference between you and me is that you had to google frantically to back up your argument. I opened the source of a kernel module I made four months ago to back up mine.
Maybe you should shut up and do the homework so you don't have to worry about running into someone who can call you on your bullshit.
__________________
Woman, I am tending to my musket.
The difference between you and me is that you had to google frantically to back up your argument. I opened the source of a kernel module I made four months ago to back up mine.
Maybe you should shut up and do the homework so you don't have to worry about running into someone who can call you on your bullshit.
You actually think writing a kernel module is hacking? I commend you for your technical expertise in writing it, but you have a LOT to learn when it comes to hacking systems. 98% of the time not all ends up what it appears to be: that is the whole concept behind genuine hacking.
You actually think writing a kernel module is hacking? I commend you for your technical expertise in writing it, but you have a LOT to learn when it comes to hacking systems. 98% of the time not all ends up what it appears to be: that is the whole concept behind genuine hacking.
So what you are saying is making someone's kernel my bitch isn't hacking.
This conversation is over.
__________________
Woman, I am tending to my musket.
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
1. Open a command prompt
2. Type "netstat -a" (without quotes)
^
This will reveal all your open listening ports (both TCP and UDP) and all associated IP addresses connected to them. If you have a backdoor it will be listed there.
127.0.0.1 is hacking me. I know it. This guy always logs into my computer and tries to steal my porn and kitten pictures.
__________________
"Fat is flavor. But, acid is life...."
And I don't have any kids that I know of... yet...
Al
How would you know for sure your phone was tapped? You can't make an assumption based off that. You'd have to ask yourself, why would anyone tapping your phone connect the jack to your connection with an open mic or any mic at all with headphones. It would make no sense.
Keep trollin trollin trollin trollin.
__________________
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com
U.S. #1 Financier of Terrorism
I don't get this argument. If all web traffic is monitored are people worried about shit they do on their machines before they encrypt it?
You do know that all transmissions are monitored don't you? Unless they are looking at an individual specifically, they only get emails that are flagged for keywords. Same with monitoring of voice trans. They've been monitoring voice since the '70's.
How would you know for sure your phone was tapped? You can't make an assumption based off that. You'd have to ask yourself, why would anyone tapping your phone connect the jack to your connection with an open mic or any mic at all with headphones. It would make no sense.
Keep trollin trollin trollin trollin.
I used to sell allot of pot amongst other things and I found out through the grapevine that someone ratted.
When I pick up my lan line and set the phone on the counter it gets a massive feedback and there seems to be many odd transpiring a doing so I'm just going to assume it is what it is.
Al
__________________
I'm a good person that does bad things.
Finding Out if Govs are Monitoring You...
