7

In theory yes, In practice maybe not but also yes at the same time. If you were to use VPN and a tor network you remove one of the security layers in the tor network. tor uses relays and your path changes every time you use tor by using a VPN you would be using the same end point (assuming you went TOR -> VPN) If you went VPN -> TOR, You would encrypt all ...


5

For me, the solution was, that I disabled the DNS through socks: in /etc/proxychains.conf file, just add a # before the line "proxy_dns"


4

No. Scanning through a proxy allows you to scan from the IP of that proxy, and it only works with certain scan types, as you're just tunneling traffic through a proxy server. Connect scans are the obvious example of a scan type that works via a SOCKS proxy. Scanning with -S allows you to explicitly set the source IP address that your scan's IPv4 (or IPv6) ...


4

YES SOCKS5 is a proxy, which means the traffic will go directly to it before the target. There is no encryption, so everything is plain text. Taken from https://unix.stackexchange.com/ SOCKS5 is just a transport protocol on top of TCP/UDP but below application layer. Thus it's comparable with TCP and UDP, too. There's no inherent encryption in SOCKS, ...


4

This is a known problem with the classic Proxychains program, which is not currently maintained. Proxychains-NG is a good alternative; it is actively maintained, and does not suffer from this particular crash.


4

I am not aware of any problems with the use of proxychains-ng and Nmap, but to be sure that Nmap is not trying to do any raw socket or packet capture operations that are incompatible with proxychains-ng, you should use the --unprivileged option. Additionally, since version 6.40, Nmap has supported proxies natively with the --proxies option, which covers the -...


3

A third-party DDOS protection service like cloudflare.com may be the best place to start for typical web traffic but these won't protect you from everything. None-the-less you've raised an important question and knowing how to protect your own servers by yourself is very important. The following will give you instructions on how to block the proxy servers ...


3

It is difficult to say definitively which is more secure or anonymous, especially without knowing who your adversaries are (global/local, active/passive, etc.). But, here are some considerations: Extra proxies provide mimimal extra security: Adding additional proxies to your chain provides minimal extra security given that the attacks against Tor generally ...


3

(default configuration file with tor: socks4 127.0.0.1 9050) Although Socks4a does, plain Socks4 does not support resolving names (i.e. DNS) at all using the Socks tunnel and it does not help if you tick a Socks5 related checkbox for this. You need to configure a Socks5 proxy instead and then tick this checkbox for resolving hostnames inside the tunnel. ...


2

SOCKS5 is a traffic encapsulation protocol which contains no kind of encryption or integrity protection. Anybody able to sniff the connection can see what you are doing and an active attacker (i.e. usually in the path) could even modify the traffic so that you would not notice. This means that your ISP is able to monitor and filter your traffic if he wants ...


2

Proxychains (and SOCKS and HTTP proxies in general) do not deal with "packets." They deal with "connections" or streams. The Nmap option you used to allow the use of proxychains was -sT, or TCP Connect scan. Nmap does not create any packets in this case; it requests the OS to perform a connection. Proxychains intercepts that request and performs the ...


2

It appears that your scan worked correctly through the TOR network. Based on the switches you used, nmap only sent a SYN to port 80 and your target responded with a RST. The timeout from proxychains just means a SYN/ACK wasn't received from the target.


2

Looks like someone has the kali.org blog page open, which has an embedded Twitter widget on. This will make requests approximately every 30 seconds, checking for new tweets from the @kalilinux Twitter account. The following screenshot from Burp, whilst the page https://www.kali.org/news/kali-linux-20171-release/ is open shows this - the final column is the ...


2

It might be useful to identify why the program crashes. I had the same problem when NSE was initiated. Looking at dmesg showed me the following: [158085.716905] nmap[28540]: segfault at 6 ip b6489234 sp bf89ee6c error 4 in liblua5.2.so.0.0.0[b6483000+36000] [158389.020572] nmap[28761]: segfault at 6 ip b7380234 sp bf9d61bc error 4 in liblua5.2.so.0.0.0[...


2

It seems that you cannot send ICMP packages over SOCKS. But you can instruct Nmap to perform a TCP Ping to do the same! “TCP ping” can be described as a TCP packet with the ACK flag set, destined for port 80 of the target host(s). The desired response from an accessible host is either a TCP packet with the RST flag set, or an ICMP echo reply, ...


1

I found the fix. The problem was a bad network configuration of my virtual machine. When I recived this errors, the virtual machine network was configured as Bridge. When I changed from Bridge to NAT, this problem was solved.


1

Inspired by the second answer, I found the solution to fix this problem. The connection with machine A is the same: ssh -f -N -D 9050 user@192.168.1.132 And in the proxychains configuration I have: socks4 127.0.0.1 9050 But I couldn't execute ping command from the attacker machine to machine B, because ping uses ICMP. Therefore, I had to use TCP or UDP ...


1

Socks proxies TCP and UDP, while ping sends ICMP packets. So you need to test using another protocol. If you want it lightweight and stateless like ping you can try to resolve a DNS name for testing UDP. Otherwise try to load a website for testing TCP connectivity.


1

By default Firefox does not do DNS lookups over the SOCKS proxy. You have to check the appropriate checkbox when configuring the proxy in Firefox. As example see https://i.stack.imgur.com/vB93s.png but in the current version of Firefox the dialog looks slightly different.


1

Was the server be compromised or something wrong with my local settings? Most likely something is misconfigured, but given the information provided, it is impossible to tell whether on the connecting client or the ProxyChains machine. If you search for proxychains 224.0.0.1 you can see quite a number of posts, like this one. Offending key for IP in /home/...


1

There is no way to do it with "external" tools. Because the information about the circuits is kept within Tor. However you can utilise Tor's control protocol. This means you can connect to your Tor client and extract information out of your client. So sending GETINFO circuit-status prints out information to your current circuit(s). Usually Tor opens several ...


1

Running requests via proxy will break a lot of default options for tools. If you look into how proxychains works you'll find: SOCKS is a layer 5 protocol. That means it doesn't care about anything below that layer in the OSI model! That means that you can't use it to tunnel protocols operating below layer 5. This includes things such as ping, ARP, etc. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible