Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.user > #225670 > unrolled thread

[OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user

Contents

  [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server riveravaldez <riveravaldezmail@gmail.com> - 2020-08-01 04:10 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-08-01 08:20 +0200
      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2020-08-01 14:00 +0200
        Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2020-08-01 17:50 +0200
        Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-08-02 00:30 +0200
          Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-08-02 01:10 +0200
            Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-08-02 03:50 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2020-08-01 09:50 +0200
      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> - 2020-08-01 12:30 +0200
        Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server tomas@tuxteam.de - 2020-08-01 14:40 +0200
          Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> - 2020-08-02 01:20 +0200
        Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server riveravaldez <riveravaldezmail@gmail.com> - 2020-08-02 04:40 +0200
          Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> - 2020-08-03 01:10 +0200
            Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> - 2020-08-11 01:20 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2020-08-01 10:00 +0200
      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server riveravaldez <riveravaldezmail@gmail.com> - 2020-08-01 11:40 +0200
        Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server deloptes <deloptes@gmail.com> - 2020-08-01 14:10 +0200
          Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server mick crane <mick.crane@gmail.com> - 2020-08-01 14:30 +0200
          Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server rhkramer@gmail.com - 2020-08-01 17:30 +0200
          Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-02 06:00 +0200
            Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2020-08-02 07:10 +0200
              Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-02 22:10 +0200
                Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2020-08-02 22:50 +0200
            Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-08-03 14:00 +0200
              Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-08-03 21:20 +0200
                Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2020-08-03 23:10 +0200
                  Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server rhkramer@gmail.com - 2020-08-03 23:30 +0200
                    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-04 03:10 +0200
                  Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-08-04 03:40 +0200
                    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-04 04:10 +0200
                      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2020-08-04 04:20 +0200
                        Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-04 06:00 +0200
                          Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-08-04 14:40 +0200
                            Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-11 06:20 +0200
                              Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-08-11 13:40 +0200
                                Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-12 05:30 +0200
                              Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-08-11 14:20 +0200
                                Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-12 05:30 +0200
                                  Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-08-12 13:40 +0200
                                    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-13 16:10 +0200
                          Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-08-04 16:10 +0200
                      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-08-04 14:40 +0200
                      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Charles Curley <charlescurley@charlescurley.com> - 2020-08-04 19:50 +0200
                  Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Greg Wooledge <wooledg@eeg.ccf.org> - 2020-08-04 13:50 +0200
                    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Celejar <celejar@gmail.com> - 2020-08-04 15:40 +0200
              Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-03 21:20 +0200
                Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2020-08-04 02:00 +0200
                  Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2020-08-04 03:10 +0200
                  Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2020-08-04 04:30 +0200
                  Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David Christensen <dpchrist@holgerdanske.com> - 2020-08-04 10:50 +0200
      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server "Thomas Schmitt" <scdbackup@gmx.net> - 2020-08-01 12:00 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Dan Ritter <dsr@randomstring.org> - 2020-08-01 13:10 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server rhkramer@gmail.com - 2020-08-01 13:20 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server David <bouncingcats@gmail.com> - 2020-08-01 14:10 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-08-01 14:40 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2020-08-01 14:40 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-08-01 17:20 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server "007@caiway.net" <007@caiway.net> - 2020-08-01 17:40 +0200
      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server "007@caiway.net" <007@caiway.net> - 2020-08-01 18:10 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us> - 2020-08-01 19:50 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2020-08-01 21:40 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server MAS Jean-Louis <jean-louis.mas@imag.fr> - 2020-08-04 16:00 +0200
      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2020-08-04 16:20 +0200
      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-08-04 17:40 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-08-04 17:50 +0200
    Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Curt <curty@free.fr> - 2020-08-04 19:10 +0200
      Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Gene Heskett <gheskett@shentel.net> - 2020-08-04 21:40 +0200
        Re: [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server Andrei POPESCU <andreimpopescu@gmail.com> - 2020-08-05 09:40 +0200

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

#225670 — [OT] Remote SSH (dynamic IP) without third-party server

Is this possible?

Hi, to clarify: I would like to connect to a remote home-machine
(dynamic IP) through SSH session but without using a third-party
server (free or paid), just with software running in both machines.

Tox and Jami protocols seem to be able to stablish a quick p2p
connection in a decentralized fashion (without the need of a central
server) and I understand that this means that both protocols allow
each client to find the other one, that is, to know their present IPs
at all time, no matter how dynamic they are. Is this correct?

If so, would be possible to use a similar mechanism to obtain at any
moment the counterpart's IP and then make a SSH login using such
information?

If there's any other simpler way (that doesn't imply the use of any
third party) please let me know, I could use anything that works.

Thanks a lot!

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#225674

On 2020-07-31 19:03, riveravaldez wrote:
> Is this possible?
> 
> Hi, to clarify: I would like to connect to a remote home-machine
> (dynamic IP) through SSH session but without using a third-party
> server (free or paid), just with software running in both machines.
> 
> Tox and Jami protocols seem to be able to stablish a quick p2p
> connection in a decentralized fashion (without the need of a central
> server) and I understand that this means that both protocols allow
> each client to find the other one, that is, to know their present IPs
> at all time, no matter how dynamic they are. Is this correct?
> 
> If so, would be possible to use a similar mechanism to obtain at any
> moment the counterpart's IP and then make a SSH login using such
> information?
> 
> If there's any other simpler way (that doesn't imply the use of any
> third party) please let me know, I could use anything that works.
> 
> Thanks a lot!

The particulars of your home Internet connection will determine what 
alternatives you have available.


I have residential VDSL service from AT&T.  Fortunately, AT&T does not 
block port 22, AT&T assigned an IPv4 address for my WAN connection, and 
the address has never changed.  So, added an entry to the /etc/hosts 
file on my laptop, configured the residential gateway to allow incoming 
WAN SSH packets, and configured the gateway to forward those packets to 
the SSH server on the LAN.  I can take my laptop remote, connect to the 
Internet, and log in to my server with SSH.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225690

David Christensen wrote:

> I have residential VDSL service from AT&T.  Fortunately, AT&T does not
> block port 22, AT&T assigned an IPv4 address for my WAN connection, and
> the address has never changed.

The OP is asking about dynamic IP, no?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225705

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Aug 01, 2020, deloptes wrote:
> David Christensen wrote:
> 
> > I have residential VDSL service from AT&T.  Fortunately, AT&T does not
> > block port 22, AT&T assigned an IPv4 address for my WAN connection, and
> > the address has never changed.
> 
> The OP is asking about dynamic IP, no?

Technically AT&T does use DHCP for their customers.  They just don't
force changes often.  In my case, I've had the IP change all of "once",
and that was after a several day long power cut (severe weather).

Most people will "probably" experience the same with their ISP (although
every ISP does operate differently).  In the past, when I had an ISP
that changed more frequently; I just used a dynamic DNS service to deal
with the changes.

-- 
|_|O|_| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|_|_|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1  E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860
|O|O|O| Former PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5  4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225714

On 2020-08-01 04:52, deloptes wrote:
> David Christensen wrote:
> 
>> I have residential VDSL service from AT&T.  Fortunately, AT&T does not
>> block port 22, AT&T assigned an IPv4 address for my WAN connection, and
>> the address has never changed.
> 
> The OP is asking about dynamic IP, no?

In my area (Tracy, California), people who have have Internet 
connections with static IP's know it and pay handsomly for such.  All 
other connections are dynamic.  Even so, some providers apparently do 
not change the dynamic addresses assignments.  My guess is that enough 
people want remote access to their home LAN and complain loudly if their 
WAN address changes.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225715

On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 03:28:47PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
>In my area (Tracy, California), people who have have Internet 
>connections with static IP's know it and pay handsomly for such.  All 
>other connections are dynamic.  Even so, some providers apparently do 
>not change the dynamic addresses assignments.  My guess is that enough 
>people want remote access to their home LAN and complain loudly if 
>their WAN address changes.

My dynamic IP used to be fairly static, now every time I reboot the 
router I get a different /16 if not /8. If you still have a somewhat 
fixed dynamic IP it probably means your ISP hasn't upgraded your 
neighborhood yet. (ISPs are generally moving to encapsulated packets 
shipped around over private address space and/or IPv6 rather than using 
a traditional routed subnet for IPv4 leaf nodes.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225721

On 2020-08-01 16:06, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 03:28:47PM -0700, David Christensen wrote:
>> In my area (Tracy, California), people who have have Internet 
>> connections with static IP's know it and pay handsomly for such.  All 
>> other connections are dynamic.  Even so, some providers apparently do 
>> not change the dynamic addresses assignments.  My guess is that enough 
>> people want remote access to their home LAN and complain loudly if 
>> their WAN address changes.
> 
> My dynamic IP used to be fairly static, now every time I reboot the 
> router I get a different /16 if not /8. If you still have a somewhat 
> fixed dynamic IP it probably means your ISP hasn't upgraded your 
> neighborhood yet. (ISPs are generally moving to encapsulated packets 
> shipped around over private address space and/or IPv6 rather than using 
> a traditional routed subnet for IPv4 leaf nodes.)

Yes -- I believe Comcast is doing that in Pleasanton.  I will need to 
figure out dynamic DNS when my connection changes.


David

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225677

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 11:03:07PM -0300, riveravaldez wrote:
> Is this possible?
> 
> Hi, to clarify: I would like to connect to a remote home-machine
> (dynamic IP) through SSH session but without using a third-party
> server (free or paid), just with software running in both machines.

That sounds like (a) magic or (b) UDP multicast, which, if you are
an El Cheapo ISP customer seems to reduce to (a).

> Tox and Jami protocols seem to be able to stablish a quick p2p
> connection in a decentralized fashion (without the need of a central
> server)

Hm. For Tox I can't say very much (besides that they do have a Client
and a Core components, which seems to suggest that you need some
well-known instance out there where the cliens do a rendez-vous.

Jami uses SIP, and that implies there is some "SIP routing machinery"
(i.e. at least one well-known address) out there to coordinate [1].

The data (voice and stuff) is exchanged peer-to-peer, but to "meet",
they do need something "out there" with a known address.

For SIP, perhaps this is part of your connectivity provider, if you
happen to pay for phone and internet to the same people. Or perhaps
not.

Perhaps the multicast deployment strory becomes brighter with IPv6,
that day around the corner when Unicorns Roam the World. Perhaps
not, because that would deprive ISPs of a chance to extract yet
another penny from you, their customer.

TL;DR: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Cheers

[1] This being inherited from telephony, it has some baroque touch
   to it:
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Session_Initiation_Protocol#Network_elements

 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225686

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Regarding the following, written by "tomas@tuxteam.de" on 2020-08-01 at 09:39 Uhr +0200:
>Hm. For Tox I can't say very much (besides that they do have a Client 
>and a Core components, which seems to suggest that you need some 
>well-known instance out there where the cliens do a rendez-vous.
>
>Jami uses SIP, and that implies there is some "SIP routing machinery" 
>(i.e. at least one well-known address) out there to coordinate [1].

Both Tox and Jami use a technology called distributed hash tables to 
map names to numbers, and the technology would be suitable for the 
OP's needs, but I don't know of any implementation for SSH.

-- 
  .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
   `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
  
"we did rate the microsoft security researcher as less-bad than the
  people who prepare the carcasses for dissection in biology
  laboratories."
              -- michael moyer, executive editor of _popular science_

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225696

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

On Sat, Aug 01, 2020 at 10:18:00PM +1200, martin f krafft wrote:
> Regarding the following, written by "tomas@tuxteam.de" on 2020-08-01 at 09:39 Uhr +0200:
> >Hm. For Tox I can't say very much (besides that they do have a
> >Client and a Core components, which seems to suggest that you need
> >some well-known instance out there where the cliens do a
> >rendez-vous.
> >
> >Jami uses SIP, and that implies there is some "SIP routing
> >machinery" (i.e. at least one well-known address) out there to
> >coordinate [1].
> 
> Both Tox and Jami use a technology called distributed hash tables to
> map names to numbers, and the technology would be suitable for the
> OP's needs, but I don't know of any implementation for SSH.

DHTs are nice and cool, but they don't solve the problem of "where
is that box I want to talk to", i.e. its IP address.

What they /do/ is to keep this "resolution table" somewhere out there
(think DNS, but not hierarchical, rather "randomly" shuffled).

When "your" client goes out there, it has to tell "someone" "hi, I'm
Sue and my IP address is currently so-and-so". To be able to tell
"someone", you need someone's IP address. This someone is most probably
one of the nodes taking part in the DHT party.

So "... to connect to a remote home-machine (dynamic IP) through SSH
 session but without using a third-party server (free or paid)...",
as the OP put it still seems a tall order. The only thing built into
IP (v4 or V6) is multicast. There, it's the IP router's job to forward
the information "hi, this guy/gal back there is interested in that
multicast group", but my impression is (I'd love to be corrected on
that) that consumer-grade ISPs don't want people to even know this
exists (let alone offer that without billing for an arm and a kidney).

Cheers
 - t

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225716

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Regarding the following, written by "tomas@tuxteam.de" on 2020-08-01 at 14:33 Uhr +0200:
>> Both Tox and Jami use a technology called distributed hash tables to 
>> map names to numbers, and the technology would be suitable for the 
>> OP's needs, but I don't know of any implementation for SSH.
>
>DHTs are nice and cool, but they don't solve the problem of "where 
>is that box I want to talk to", i.e. its IP address.
>
>What they /do/ is to keep this "resolution table" somewhere out there 
>(think DNS, but not hierarchical, rather "randomly" shuffled).

Not entirely sure what your response adds, so let me just suggest a 
Tor hidden service to the OP instead of continuing this.

Multicast is cute but wouldn't actually solve the problem; instead 
of an entity mapping names to endpoint addresses, you now need an 
entity to map names to multicast groups, and manage the namespace.

-- 
  .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
   `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
  
now I lay me back to sleep.
the speaker's dull; the subject's deep.
if he should stop before I wake,
give me a nudge for goodness' sake.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225722

On 8/1/20, martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> wrote:
> Regarding the following, written by "tomas@tuxteam.de" on 2020-08-01 at
> 09:39 Uhr +0200:
>>Hm. For Tox I can't say very much (besides that they do have a Client
>>and a Core components, which seems to suggest that you need some
>>well-known instance out there where the cliens do a rendez-vous.
>>
>>Jami uses SIP, and that implies there is some "SIP routing machinery"
>>(i.e. at least one well-known address) out there to coordinate [1].
>
> Both Tox and Jami use a technology called distributed hash tables to
> map names to numbers, and the technology would be suitable for the
> OP's needs, but I don't know of any implementation for SSH.

Thanks a lot, Martin, these are some implementations I've found so
far, but still couldn't test them:

«Tuntox is a program which forwards TCP connections over the Tox
protocol. This allows low-latency access to distant machines behind a
NAT you can't control or with a dynamic IP address.»[1] This is
officially packaged on Arch[2].
It also proposes «How to make a point-to-point VPN»[3]

«toxvpn is a powerful tool that allows one to make tunneled point to
point connections over Tox.»[4]

«ToxTun is a library that aims to provide an easy way to set up a
virtual network connection via Tox. (...) When you try to connect to a
friend, your friend is asked whether or not he wants to accept the
connection. After he accepted, ToxTun selects an 192.168.0.0/24 subnet
that isn't in use at both PCs (for example 192.168.17.0/24) and sets
up the interfaces accordingly. (...) IPv6 is also supported and should
work out of the box with the auto generated link-local addresses.»[5]

Being tox v3-GPLed they all inherit the licensing.

Any comment/advice on any of them?, would be most appreciated.

Thanks again.

[1] https://github.com/gjedeer/tuntox
[2] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/tuntox/
[3] https://github.com/gjedeer/tuntox/blob/master/VPN.md
[4] https://github.com/cleverca22/toxvpn
[5] http://toxtun.jschwab.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225761

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

Regarding the following, written by "riveravaldez" on 2020-08-01 at 23:37 Uhr -0300:
>Any comment/advice on any of them?, would be most appreciated.

All 3 seem to be using TUN, which is what you want at this stage. 
Now you just have to try which one works best for you. I'd also take 
into account how active the maintainer is, and how old the code 
base.

-- 
  .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
   `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
  
an egg has the shortest sex-life of all: if gets laid once; it gets
eaten once. it also has to come in a box with 11 others, and the
only person who will sit on its face is its mother.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#226086

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw

This may be of interest to the OP: https://github.com/noffle/airpipe

-- 
  .''`.   martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
   `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
  
stupidity management for the superuser
is a user space issue in unix systems.
                                                          -- alan cox

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225678

On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 23:03:07 -0300
riveravaldez <riveravaldezmail@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is this possible?
> 
> Hi, to clarify: I would like to connect to a remote home-machine
> (dynamic IP) through SSH session but without using a third-party
> server (free or paid), just with software running in both machines.
> 
> Tox and Jami protocols seem to be able to stablish a quick p2p
> connection in a decentralized fashion (without the need of a central
> server) and I understand that this means that both protocols allow
> each client to find the other one, that is, to know their present IPs
> at all time, no matter how dynamic they are. Is this correct?

Port scanning the entire Internet? Are you sure? There's no other way
for a machine to find another, somewhere in the world, without knowing
its IP address in advance. It will almost certainly turn out that these
protocols rely on machines registering with their servers each time
they are powered up after being given a new dynamic address.

> 
> If so, would be possible to use a similar mechanism to obtain at any
> moment the counterpart's IP and then make a SSH login using such
> information?
> 
> If there's any other simpler way (that doesn't imply the use of any
> third party) please let me know, I could use anything that works.
> 

I would have thought that the only practical way would be to find the
IP range your home machine is in and have the remote machine scan it to
find your home machine, hoping that it's a small block. And hope that
your ISP's firewall doesn't take exception to that and block you.
Probably best to use another port than 22 for this.

Better still is, as David suggested, get a fixed IP address for your
home connection, but many ISPs do not offer this option, even for
'business' accounts.

And you are using keys for ssh, and not passwords, aren't you?

-- 
Joe

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225682

Hi, thanks a lot for the answers.

> I have residential VDSL service from AT&T.  Fortunately, AT&T does not block port 22, AT&T assigned an IPv4 address for my WAN connection, and the address has never changed.  So, added an entry to the /etc/hosts file on my laptop, configured the residential gateway to allow incoming WAN SSH packets, and configured the gateway to forward those packets to the SSH server on the LAN.  I can take my laptop remote, connect to the Internet, and log in to my server with SSH.

Thanks a lot, I'd taken note of this method.
I'm in Argentina. Home connections are all dynamic mostly.
Gonna check with ISPs current WAN situation.

> Hm. For Tox I can't say very much (besides that they do have a Client
> and a Core components, which seems to suggest that you need some
> well-known instance out there where the cliens do a rendez-vous.

I did some more research and found:

«To be able to connect to others, Tox needs to connect to a DHT node
first. All DHT nodes are connected to each other, and since everyone
is connected to at least one DHT node, you can connect to others one
way or the other.»[1]

I'm not informed about the nature of those DHT nodes.

> Jami uses SIP, and that implies there is some "SIP routing machinery"
> (i.e. at least one well-known address) out there to coordinate [1].
>
> For SIP, perhaps this is part of your connectivity provider, if you
> happen to pay for phone and internet to the same people. Or perhaps
> not.

The thing here is mostly monopolistic. There's a single
post-fusion-group that handles phone, internet and even cable
television... Anyway, Jami works fine and I can talk between Jami
clients anytime, so: maybe a way to extract the current IP from the
other Jami client to establish a pre-configured SSH session?

> Port scanning the entire Internet? Are you sure? There's no other way
> for a machine to find another, somewhere in the world, without knowing
> its IP address in advance. It will almost certainly turn out that these
> protocols rely on machines registering with their servers each time
> they are powered up after being given a new dynamic address.

Until now I've found a couple of alternatives using the
tox-DHT-decentralized idea:

«Tuntox is a program which forwards TCP connections over the Tox
protocol. This allows low-latency access to distant machines behind a
NAT you can't control or with a dynamic IP address.»[2] This is
officially packaged on Arch[3], but still couldn't find time to test
it.
It also proposes «How to make a point-to-point VPN»[4]

«toxvpn is a powerful tool that allows one to make tunneled point to
point connections over Tox.»[5]

«ToxTun is a library that aims to provide an easy way to set up a
virtual network connection via Tox. (...) When you try to connect to a
friend, your friend is asked whether or not he wants to accept the
connection. After he accepted, ToxTun selects an 192.168.0.0/24 subnet
that isn't in use at both PCs (for example 192.168.17.0/24) and sets
up the interfaces accordingly. (...) IPv6 is also supported and should
work out of the box with the auto generated link-local addresses.»[6]

Because tox is v3-GPLed they all inherit the licensing.

Any hint/opinion on any of these?

> I would have thought that the only practical way would be to find the
> IP range your home machine is in and have the remote machine scan it to
> find your home machine, hoping that it's a small block. And hope that
> your ISP's firewall doesn't take exception to that and block you.
> Probably best to use another port than 22 for this.

Well, I tested this idea with tor-browser: running a simple HTML
server in a smartphone connected to my home-WiFi and after
port-forwarding the modem/router it was accessible from "outside"
(tor-browser running in a desktop machine connected to the same
router), if I recall correctly. I thought this should work also with
SSH, but you have to inform the other part your present IP address at
each log-in, don't you?

> And you are using keys for ssh, and not passwords, aren't you?

Right now I'm still not using anything ;) , but that's the idea, yes,
thanks for remind it to me.

Any other advice is extensively welcome. Thanks!

[1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Tox
[2] https://github.com/gjedeer/tuntox
[3] https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/tuntox/
[4] https://github.com/gjedeer/tuntox/blob/master/VPN.md
[5] https://github.com/cleverca22/toxvpn
[6] http://toxtun.jschwab.org/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225692

riveravaldez wrote:

> Until now I've found a couple of alternatives using the
> tox-DHT-decentralized idea:

believe me you do not want to publish your IPs on DHT like ToX - it causes
only troubles. You never know who is collecting those IPs and for what
reason. I always see SSH attacks on the firewall after using torrent sites.
It might be unrelated, but is suspicious coincidence. It happens every
time. The OpenVPN also registers attempts to connect.

If I were you I would pay for a domain and put a script that would write the
IP somewhere there, so that you can find it. It is cheaper than paying for
DDNS service and the domain belongs to you - alltogether costs about
150,-/y.

Nothing is for free!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225693

On 2020-08-01 13:02, deloptes wrote:
<snipped>
> If I were you I would pay for a domain and put a script that would 
> write the
> IP somewhere there, so that you can find it.
<snipped

why didn't I think of that.

mick
-- 
Key ID    4BFEBB31

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225703

On Saturday, August 01, 2020 08:02:59 AM deloptes wrote:
> riveravaldez wrote:
> > Until now I've found a couple of alternatives using the
> 
> > tox-DHT-decentralized idea:
> believe me you do not want to publish your IPs on DHT like ToX - it causes
> only troubles. You never know who is collecting those IPs and for what
> reason. I always see SSH attacks on the firewall after using torrent sites.
> It might be unrelated, but is suspicious coincidence. It happens every
> time. The OpenVPN also registers attempts to connect.
> 
> If I were you I would pay for a domain and put a script that would write
> the IP somewhere there, so that you can find it. It is cheaper than paying
> for DDNS service and the domain belongs to you - alltogether costs about
> 150,-/y.
> 
> Nothing is for free!

Well, I think a domain in .xyz (or something like that) is free -- I'd 
consider that if I needed a domain -- I don't know the details of how you get 
that to work in DNS, if you have to contract with someone for that service.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#225726

On Sat 01 Aug 2020 at 14:02:59 (+0200), deloptes wrote:
> riveravaldez wrote:
> 
> > Until now I've found a couple of alternatives using the
> > tox-DHT-decentralized idea:
> 
> believe me you do not want to publish your IPs on DHT like ToX - it causes
> only troubles. You never know who is collecting those IPs and for what
> reason. I always see SSH attacks on the firewall after using torrent sites.
> It might be unrelated, but is suspicious coincidence. It happens every
> time. The OpenVPN also registers attempts to connect.
> 
> If I were you I would pay for a domain and put a script that would write the
> IP somewhere there, so that you can find it. It is cheaper than paying for
> DDNS service and the domain belongs to you - alltogether costs about
> 150,-/y.
> 
> Nothing is for free!

This should be possible for free, so long as you can send emails from
home. Just register an account with, say, hotmail, and send an email
each day (or at an appropriate interval) from your home's computer.
Whenever you want to connect home, login to the email account and
look at the headers of the most recent email. The first hop will be
from your home's computer to your ISP, and gives the IP address.
For examples, look at the first hop in many of the emails on this
list. (Frequently, the ISP will generate a corresponding hostname
using numbers in the IP address.)

BUT, as the OP posts from a gmail account, I have no idea whether they
can send emails from their own computer, rather than using some web
software on a server somewhere.

Currently, my IP address has been stable since I switched on the modem
(which runs 24/7) after my Christmas break.

Cheers,
David.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 4  [1] 2 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user

csiph-web