Date: Wed, 11 Dec 1996 19:58:59 +1030 (CST) From: Michael Smith <msmith@atrad.adelaide.edu.au> To: obrien@NUXI.com (David E. O'Brien) Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Risk of having bpf0? (was URGENT: Packet sniffer found on my system) Message-ID: <199612110929.TAA23998@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> In-Reply-To: <Mutt.19961211011156.obrien@relay.nuxi.com> from "David E. O'Brien" at "Dec 11, 96 01:11:56 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
(moved from -security, where this doesn't belong anymore) David E. O'Brien stands accused of saying: > > Tcpdump does all this and lots more; the filter language is pretty powerful. > > > > The fact that it knows how to interpret lots of protocols and that you > > can extend it (courtesy of the source and an easy internal interface) > > puts it over anyuthing else I've seen yet. > > Except for Solaris's snoop. The output is *SO* much nicer than tcpdumps. > If you ever get a chance try snoop -v or snoop -V. tcpdump's output is ideally designed for being digested by something else; I've done Tcl/Tk stuff, but to be pretty you need lots of CPU. > -- David (obrien@cs.ucdavis.edu) -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199612110929.TAA23998>