|
Donations |
|
 |
|
|
|
If you found this site helpful, please donate to help keep it online
Don't want to use PayPal? Try our physical address
|
|
|
Survey |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Ikeb
General
Premium Member
Joined: Apr 20, 2003
Posts: 3565
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
 Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 5:02 am Post subject: B9 host file entries |
|
|
The FAQ isn't clear on this point but what exactly are the B9 entries in the host file doing? For example:
| Code: |
# Begin B9
127.98.9.1 pop.server1.b9
127.98.9.2 pop.server2.b9
127.98.9.3 pop.server3.b9
# End B9 |
I entered the last two mappings manually myself and they work but I have no idea WHY they work. Why is the IP address 127.98.9.* ? Does B9 somehow assume those addresses? I can't find anything in B9 Options that makes such an association.
_________________
I like SPAM ... on my sandwich!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
hamster
Firetrust Host
Joined: Mar 27, 2003
Posts: 74
Location: New_Zealand
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Ikeb
Benign needs to alter the Windows HOSTS file so that the system is able to resolve the "mail.server.name.b9" into a specific IP address for 'localhost' so Benign can determine which account to scan the mail from.
Without an appropriate entry in the HOSTS file, the computer would not be able to resolve the "mail.server.name.b9" entry and mail could not be retrieved by the mail client.
The above is the bit in our faq
http://www.firetrust.com/support/benign/faq/#hosts_file
This explains it for me. Is this what you mean?
Cheers
Hamish
Firetrust |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ikeb
General
Premium Member
Joined: Apr 20, 2003
Posts: 3565
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 11:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hamster wrote: |
The above is the bit in our faq
http://www.firetrust.com/support/benign/faq/#hosts_file
This explains it for me. Is this what you mean?
|
No. I read the FAQ and couldn't find the info I'm looking for. As I stated in my post, I'd like to know why the particular IP addresses listed in the host file (127.98.9.n) are used by B9. Specifically:
- How does B9 determine which addresses to use?
- Can this address be changed by the user?
- Would a user be able to figure it out if the installation program failed to modify the host file?
- What happens if those addresses are used by some other networking device?
- Why not just use the "customary" loopback address (127.0.0.1) and change the port # to prevent clashing proxies?
_________________
I like SPAM ... on my sandwich!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ikeb
General
Premium Member
Joined: Apr 20, 2003
Posts: 3565
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2004 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hello! Any answers for me Hamish?
_________________
I like SPAM ... on my sandwich! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hamster
Firetrust Host
Joined: Mar 27, 2003
Posts: 74
Location: New_Zealand
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 05, 2004 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Ikester
Apologies for delay. I am getting the developers to give me the good oil on your questions.
I will update as soon as I hear from them.
Thanks
Hamish |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hamster
Firetrust Host
Joined: Mar 27, 2003
Posts: 74
Location: New_Zealand
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2004 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Ikester
Here is the good oil from our developers. Many thanks to them.
Cheers
Hamish
Firetrust
How does B9 determine which addresses to use?
The IP address and hostname in the hosts file let Benign know which actual server to connect to. Benign compares the destination hostname (<hostname>.b9) with the server name in the account settings (<hostname>); if they match (excluding the .b9 suffix), it will connect to the matching server specified in the settings. If the HOSTS file hostname doesn't match any server name in the B9 settings, Benign returns the following:
-ERR Can't find the account for '<hostname>' - please check your account settings in the Options dialog
This error may be presented as a cryptic error code depending on your mail client.
Can this address be changed by the user?
Benign only accepts connections to the range 127.98.9.(1-255) , you can change the last number to an arbitrary value within the (1-255) range so long as you don't modify the hostname part of the HOSTS file.
Would a user be able to figure it out if the installation program failed to modify the host file?
When Benign modifies the HOSTS file it adds the '# Begin B9' and '# End B9' comments to the file. So long as you made sure the host name was correct: <servername.b9> and the IP address falls in the correct range and is unique, and the account details are present in the Benign settings, then the HOSTS file will be editable manually. Hopefully it won't be necessary though.
What happens if those addresses are used by some other networking device?
If another program is listening on the same localhost listening port as Benign (default 110) there will be problems, regardless of the actual IP address in the 127.x.x.x range. You will need to change the port number that Benign listens for incoming connections on in the 'Options' >> 'General' tab to avoid any such conflicts.
Why not just use the "customary" loopback address (127.0.0.1) and change the port # to prevent clashing proxies?
Using different addresses in the range 127.x.x.x allows Benign to use the IP address to distinguish between accounts, and it is less complicated for the user than having different port numbers for each account. Proxies will only clash if the port number is the same, not just the IP address. Using many IP addresses and one port number reduces the likelihood of clashes. Incidentally, the 127.98.9.x range was chosen arbitrarily because 98 is the ASCII value for the character 'b' , so 98.9 is: b9 As far as we are aware no other application uses this range for anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ikeb
General
Premium Member
Joined: Apr 20, 2003
Posts: 3565
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 12:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hamster wrote: |
Hi Ikester
Here is the good oil from our developers. Many thanks to them.
Cheers
Hamish
Firetrust |
Thanks Hamish. This info helps to fill in the gaps.
There seems to be some bad oil mixed in though:
| Quote: |
What happens if those addresses are used by some other networking device?
If another program is listening on the same localhost listening port as Benign (default 110) there will be problems, regardless of the actual IP address in the 127.x.x.x range. You will need to change the port number that Benign listens for incoming connections on in the 'Options' >> 'General' tab to avoid any such conflicts. |
Sorry but this is plain wrong. A conflict occurs only if BOTH the IP address and port number match. I have five proxies using port 110 (three for B9, one for POPFile, and one for Hotmail Popper) but none clash because they use different IP addresses (172.98.9.x, 172.0.0.1, and 172.0.0.2 respectively).
I also have some followup to the answer for my next question. Not bad oil persay but perhaps 10W20 instead of the real good 5W40 stuff:
| Quote: |
Why not just use the "customary" loopback address (127.0.0.1) and change the port # to prevent clashing proxies?
Using different addresses in the range 127.x.x.x allows Benign to use the IP address to distinguish between accounts, and it is less complicated for the user than having different port numbers for each account. |
A lot of proxies obtain the account specifics during the uname and password handshake. The approach used by B9 does avoid that config complication at the cost of having to modify the host file (and we know there have been issues because of that since some other programs arrogantly assume that the host file is just for their exclusive use.).
| Quote: |
| Proxies will only clash if the port number is the same, not just the IP address. |
Right, both the port # and IP address must match for a clash to occur.
| Quote: |
| Using many IP addresses and one port number reduces the likelihood of clashes. |
This statement is misleading. There is zero likelihood of a clash if either the IP address OR port # differ. Dunno where "reduced likelihood" comes from unless a reduction from "100% certain" to "0% possible" is what is being alluded to.
_________________
I like SPAM ... on my sandwich!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hamster
Firetrust Host
Joined: Mar 27, 2003
Posts: 74
Location: New_Zealand
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 07, 2004 9:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Ikester
Got to ask the developers for an oil change. So I will get back as soon as i can.
Cheers
Hamish
Firetrust |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hamster
Firetrust Host
Joined: Mar 27, 2003
Posts: 74
Location: New_Zealand
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Ikester
Got feedback from the developers for you.
Cheers
Hamish
Firetrust
| Quote: |
What happens if those addresses are used by some other networking device?
If another program is listening on the same localhost listening port as Benign (default 110) there will be problems, regardless of the actual IP address in the 127.x.x.x range. You will need to change the port number that Benign listens for incoming connections on in the 'Options' >> 'General' tab to avoid any such conflicts.
Sorry but this is plain wrong. A conflict occurs only if BOTH the IP address and port number match. I have five proxies using port 110 (three for B9, one for POPFile, and one for Hotmail Popper) but none clash because they use different IP addresses (172.98.9.x, 172.0.0.1, and 172.0.0.2 respectively). |
I have tested it out though and discovered that Ike is indeed correct that is actaully possible (at least for some versions of Windows) to have multiple applications listening on various loopback IP addresses that should conflict on the same port.
It shouldn't be possible though -- Benign is listening to the * (wildcard) loopback address, which means that any connection to any address in the 127.x.x.x range will be acted upon by Benign. You can confirm this by telneting to any such address in the 127.x.x.x range and you should get the Benign 'false' connection refused message:
-ERR Connections are allowed only from the local host (127.0.0.1 is not a local address)
Listening on the wildcard address should block all other applications from listening (on the same port) on a specific IP addresses in the range, as they are covered by the wildcard. Some versions of Windows do block this, which is why we had to add the ability to change Benign's listening port. I tried a similar experiment in a linux environment (not with Benign, but with the netcat tool), and the conflicts were indeed blocked as I expected. Only one socket could be open for listening on the wildcard loopback address.
Any other application listening on the same port as Benign _should_ cause a conflict, but the behaviour seems inconsitent between versions of Windows. It is a problem with Windows' behaviour, and I'm not yet sure if there are any potential sideeffects from it.
I am not sure how Windows determines which socket should be connected to when there are three or more bindings to the wildcard loopback address as I have been able to create. It could lead to confusion.
If the the 127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.2 addresses are indeed specific and not the wildcard loopback address like Benign, I would assume that in practice there wouldn't be a conflict.
To check, open a DOS prompt and use the netstat command:
netstat -an
a wildcard loopback address (Benign's) will look like:
TCP 0.0.0.0:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
while a specific one should look like:
TCP 127.0.0.1 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
We are thinking of possibly changing Benign to only listen to the 127.98.9.x range, which may help clear up some of this up. I may not have been clear previously that Benign listens for _all_ connections in the 127.x.x.x range, but will reject anything that falls outside of the 127.98.9.x range.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ikeb
General
Premium Member
Joined: Apr 20, 2003
Posts: 3565
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 11, 2004 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hamster wrote: |
Hi Ikester
Got feedback from the developers for you.
Cheers
Hamish
Firetrust |
Thanks Hamish. I must say that the plot thickens....
| Quote: |
I have tested it out though and discovered that Ike is indeed correct that is actaully possible (at least for some versions of Windows) to have multiple applications listening on various loopback IP addresses that should conflict on the same port.
It shouldn't be possible though -- Benign is listening to the * (wildcard) loopback address, which means that any connection to any address in the 127.x.x.x range will be acted upon by Benign. You can confirm this by telneting to any such address in the 127.x.x.x range and you should get the Benign 'false' connection refused message:
-ERR Connections are allowed only from the local host (127.0.0.1 is not a local address) |
Let me get this straight ... some proxies are arrogant enough to take over the host file. B9 is actually arrogant enough to take over the whole 127.x.x.x address space?
| Quote: |
| Listening on the wildcard address should block all other applications from listening (on the same port) on a specific IP addresses in the range, as they are covered by the wildcard. Some versions of Windows do block this, which is why we had to add the ability to change Benign's listening port. I tried a similar experiment in a linux environment (not with Benign, but with the netcat tool), and the conflicts were indeed blocked as I expected. Only one socket could be open for listening on the wildcard loopback address. |
I'm shocked ... and surprised that there haven't been folks reporting problems when attempting to run their proxies.
| Quote: |
| Any other application listening on the same port as Benign _should_ cause a conflict, but the behaviour seems inconsitent between versions of Windows. It is a problem with Windows' behaviour, and I'm not yet sure if there are any potential sideeffects from it. |
In my case I didn't think I had to change loopback port # (127.0.0.1) to run POPFile. It ran just fine. The POPFile (wiki) FAQ advised me to set Hotmail Popper to 127.0.0.2 so that's what I did, never expecting that B9 had claimed the whole address space.
| Quote: |
If the the 127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.2 addresses are indeed specific and not the wildcard loopback address like Benign, I would assume that in practice there wouldn't be a conflict.
To check, open a DOS prompt and use the netstat command:
netstat -an
a wildcard loopback address (Benign's) will look like:
TCP 0.0.0.0:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
while a specific one should look like:
TCP 127.0.0.1 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING |
I get back the following (plus more which I didn't list):
| Code: |
TCP 0.0.0.0:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 0.0.0.0:135 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 0.0.0.0:445 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 0.0.0.0:1025 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 0.0.0.0:1026 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.1:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.1:110 127.0.0.1:3786 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.1:110 127.0.0.1:3787 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.1:110 127.0.0.1:3788 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.1:8080 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.1:8080 127.0.0.1:3780 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.1:8080 127.0.0.1:3785 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.2:25 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.2:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.2:3796 127.0.0.2:110 TIME_WAIT |
| Quote: |
| We are thinking of possibly changing Benign to only listen to the 127.98.9.x range, which may help clear up some of this up. |
That certainly would reduce the confusion factor. It might help some folks with their proxies ... those who who have a problem changing the port #. Out of curiousity, why didn't you guys do what most (every?) other proxy vendor does ... relay the addressing via the uname/password handshake?
| Quote: |
| I may not have been clear previously that Benign listens for _all_ connections in the 127.x.x.x range, but will reject anything that falls outside of the 127.98.9.x range. |
OK that explains why the 127.98.9.n entries must be in the host file .... but you've also left me scratching my head on this last point. If B9 rejects everything outside 127.98.9.x, what's the problem?
_________________
I like SPAM ... on my sandwich!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ikeb
General
Premium Member
Joined: Apr 20, 2003
Posts: 3565
Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| hamster wrote: |
Hi Ikester
Got feedback from the developers for you.
Cheers
Hamish
Firetrust |
Thanks Hamish. I must say that the plot thickens....
| Quote: |
I have tested it out though and discovered that Ike is indeed correct that is actaully possible (at least for some versions of Windows) to have multiple applications listening on various loopback IP addresses that should conflict on the same port.
It shouldn't be possible though -- Benign is listening to the * (wildcard) loopback address, which means that any connection to any address in the 127.x.x.x range will be acted upon by Benign. You can confirm this by telneting to any such address in the 127.x.x.x range and you should get the Benign 'false' connection refused message:
-ERR Connections are allowed only from the local host (127.0.0.1 is not a local address) |
Let me get this straight ... some proxies are arrogant enough to take over the host file. B9 is actually arrogant enough to take over the whole 127.x.x.x address space?
| Quote: |
| Listening on the wildcard address should block all other applications from listening (on the same port) on a specific IP addresses in the range, as they are covered by the wildcard. Some versions of Windows do block this, which is why we had to add the ability to change Benign's listening port. I tried a similar experiment in a linux environment (not with Benign, but with the netcat tool), and the conflicts were indeed blocked as I expected. Only one socket could be open for listening on the wildcard loopback address. |
I'm shocked ... and surprised that there haven't been folks reporting problems when attempting to run their proxies.
| Quote: |
| Any other application listening on the same port as Benign _should_ cause a conflict, but the behaviour seems inconsitent between versions of Windows. It is a problem with Windows' behaviour, and I'm not yet sure if there are any potential sideeffects from it. |
In my case I didn't think I had to change loopback port # (127.0.0.1) to run POPFile. It ran just fine. The POPFile (wiki) FAQ advised me to set Hotmail Popper to 127.0.0.2 so that's what I did, never expecting that B9 had claimed the whole address space.
| Quote: |
If the the 127.0.0.1 and 127.0.0.2 addresses are indeed specific and not the wildcard loopback address like Benign, I would assume that in practice there wouldn't be a conflict.
To check, open a DOS prompt and use the netstat command:
netstat -an
a wildcard loopback address (Benign's) will look like:
TCP 0.0.0.0:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
while a specific one should look like:
TCP 127.0.0.1 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING |
I get back the following (plus more which I didn't list):
| Code: |
TCP 0.0.0.0:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 0.0.0.0:135 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 0.0.0.0:445 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 0.0.0.0:1025 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 0.0.0.0:1026 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.1:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.1:110 127.0.0.1:3786 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.1:110 127.0.0.1:3787 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.1:110 127.0.0.1:3788 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.1:8080 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.1:8080 127.0.0.1:3780 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.1:8080 127.0.0.1:3785 TIME_WAIT
TCP 127.0.0.2:25 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.2:110 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING
TCP 127.0.0.2:3796 127.0.0.2:110 TIME_WAIT |
| Quote: |
| We are thinking of possibly changing Benign to only listen to the 127.98.9.x range, which may help clear up some of this up. |
That certainly would reduce the confusion factor. It might help some folks with their proxies ... those who who have a problem changing the port #. Out of curiousity, why didn't you guys do what most (every?) other proxy vendor does ... relay the addressing via the uname/password handshake?
| Quote: |
| I may not have been clear previously that Benign listens for _all_ connections in the 127.x.x.x range, but will reject anything that falls outside of the 127.98.9.x range. |
OK that explains why the 127.98.9.n entries must be in the host file .... but you've also left me scratching my head on this last point. If B9 rejects everything outside 127.98.9.x, what's the problem?
_________________
I like SPAM ... on my sandwich!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tosbsas
Trooper
Joined: Feb 27, 2003
Posts: 15
Location: Argentina
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 02, 2004 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Maybe thats the page I can get help:
I am using Becky Email and Nod32 and Spampal.
Works fine, but Nod listenes to 110 and Spampal listens to 9110. I can use benign together with these two just fine, setting it to listen to 9110.
But: Looks like that way nod is checking twice the mails (get twice the information - checked by nod) I got rid of that when using spampal und chaning spampla to listen to 9110 as well as Becky.
No with the 4 proggies together any ideas??
Ruben |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8a © 2001 phpBB Group
Version 2.0.6 of PHP-Nuke Port by Tom Nitzschner © 2002 www.toms-home.com
Version 2.2 by Paul Laudanski © 2003-2004 Computer Cops
|
You can syndicate our news using the file RSS 0.91, ultramode.txt, or RSS 1.0.
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Login to check your private messages
Login
