On Mar 10, 1:45*am, DanS
wrote:
Rick Jones wrote in news:hn66ht$h7r$2
@usenet01.boi.hp.com:

In comp.os.linux.networking Bob wrote:
Have you tried SNAT? I noticed it on YouTube last week.
http://www.snat-project.com/documentation.html

I'm not sure how robust this:

* * This action is the one I really like. With the help of it you can
* * check if a host on your network is running a sniffer (well,

SNIP

* * host I want to check is 192.168.1.8 As usual go to the directory
* * where you have snat.jar and execute the command (if you have any
* * problems go here) :

will be. *First, I suppose that 99 times out of 10 a host responding
to that MAC address will be in promiscuous mode, but since the group
bit is set... *And I would think all it takes is a small change to the
ARP code to verify that the destination MAC was a full broadcast...

Is this supposedly for Windows, Linux, OSX, BSD, etc ?

I'm sure it's OS specific. For instance, a Windows box will not reply to a
broadcast ping, but a Linux box will.

But why Windows box does not reply to the broadcast ping :-( whereas
the Linux box replies to the broadcast ping ? That is,
any specific reasons for not being supported in Windows and for
being supported in Linux ?

Thx in advans,
Karthik Balaguru