[plug] Messaging using SNMP
acooks at gmail.com
Mon Dec 8 12:53:35 UTC 2014
Having recently implemented an SNMP agent, I strongly encourage you to try
other options first.
Almost everything uses port 80 these days, so is that not an option?
If you need to subvert IT, socat on UDP port 53 is sometimes an interesting
On 8 Dec 2014 20:04, "Jason Nicholls" <jason at mindsocket.com.au> wrote:
> Don't do SNMP its a lot of complex work. However you could always do
> something on UDP over the same port.
> On 8 Dec 2014 01:31, "Craig Foster" <craig at fostware.net> wrote:
>> If SNMP is “less firewalled” then they’re doing it wrong…
>> SNMP allows configuration changes and file transfers on a lot of Cisco
>> devices, and most devices will succumb to sensitive information leakage.
>> Any IT Admin worth their coin will firewall SNMP down to specific IPs, or
>> even separate it to a management or OOB VLAN/Network.
>> TL;DR Wouldn’t go down that path…
>> Craig F.
>> *From:* plug [mailto:plug-bounces at plug.org.au] *On Behalf Of *Kevin
>> *Sent:* Monday, 8 December 2014 2:09 PM
>> *To:* plug at plug.org.au
>> *Subject:* [plug] Messaging using SNMP
>> I need to pass short strings from one pc to another. At present I 'm
>> using TCP socket connections, since that works with Moxa NPorts too. In an
>> environment where the IT environment is 'hostile ' perhaps SNMP might be a
>> less firewalled alternative. SNMP does look rather daunting to get into.
>> Am I wasting my time considering it?
>> PLUG discussion list: plug at plug.org.au
>> Committee e-mail: committee at plug.org.au
>> PLUG Membership: http://www.plug.org.au/membership
> PLUG discussion list: plug at plug.org.au
> Committee e-mail: committee at plug.org.au
> PLUG Membership: http://www.plug.org.au/membership
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the plug