Should I consider doing this even if Cisco works fine for me? Is there any advantage?

Originally Posted by Chris L

Should I consider doing this even if Cisco works fine for me? Is there any advantage?

The advantage is you don't "need" to have anti-virus. I never go anywhere on the internet that can be potentially damaging my computer. That built in windows defender thing already does a decent enough job.

Originally Posted by tuddend

Hey Ownaginatios that code worked great to bypass the cisco clients. The only problem is that now I can't search with google.com, I get a 403 forbidden error saying the client does not have permission to visit the URL. It also asks me to return this block of code to the google team:

/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/
NYBmg1KZyViV13CZ36giq e48rkN48UUV-BVJjqD5xeedBpiHl
r1ynokBiQjkKGos1-D5I03H7NjksraYieM2d4P hZr8rr6xxi3
Zbf951MONz8hjupIYTUbs JT55VyVOji-oAcGZjNimIYE14VF8
Ghxijta0AYhtxVOyPsfe5 Zq0Vrg71m7Gzsvu_MrZcO YdiD8am
HkuaPxAB5oEsiEXdCfAD9 OZk5fjrv8oe0Mtui_wICn 7jTM2uz
oBUjHX8Fyxhfq-6p-PW8fhsg8tZsC8BWjPzQHS emGtukGnw24
R3BDpacsZGyAemYjtbrhD 5AtyBQgOnf70CuY0Fmnp5 pKTS4uS
rbNEffEDI3gcp1eDBENwE EOr6WysYegT56UcoY8YwP QyBEfvx
1tzq3w38PDSANHtMuE1mY EKdFOim0NTx0XGt0ZT1Xs vw3b3EX
4XrKMmeXuouP2Lb_vdsxC Kkol5izxGBTLK0jzAn6dZ 2_JMuVE
Co_PGnnj-4EASpKFjKtcR7w9LFfSCD KqeEq7mnrUstM-WIfWQ
R2FOyc-tuaRHX6c0jLzG-Y6Fx28SD2wgQmF6AZUcIK 0rW-RKV
Swz-jXF4EBrmhAvXsacV42UfM Rljr5qCcsoIz70x31v3E9 zSZ
cCGyDo7VjyNf5ttmgW9r2 gCj8Fuw1x9sVQWHTwAYdm C01WGf3
8KY3nffbYnpItCZ4wZ4UF ReMXqmXfcm88kvIYvovTK phiJvhI
Mn-AQIJNnj3sYQTUJu97LiX2 -bs9kFRlqoJ2TljDjQVf7m v3w
_sSfPK-tPkdaZg0lTl3eyrLKEzlK _AUMBiz5Phl290mSHp_vy
EiVOpsq4n0e0sjVnKTgv4 t5vVs9OP8EWIS4vhLVuAN 2z7SfDm
bPnWsFXXe0bfe9fiMhp8s 1LQK90rg5hYAgbLmoVjMH MZ0WeRo
ay-XoB1oKQzff-nnkAKYGNEfhYSqJoM1aVu TCPopksj8EGc_g
_S0kudspvK4zTV91cB9un ibVaAsqsSqnPNpGfGoBzr adjPSZO
h7spajeUff0SgFHKsgGAV YLLGiWPfZXfPGm5o4TtwU 1mfsP5Y
4ndyRqJC4ufhBrNBzFl8G fFTrH_TdOinszzU6Rpc49 CcM0lpJ
4hePZLVcgwQdJD3aPGdU=
+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+/+

Anyone else come across this yet?

Yes, me too, try an empty string, see if that's enough to let you through and also search google.

its not good to just delete the string because alot of websites depend on that string... they check if you are using IE or Firefox and depending on what it says, thats what you will see... so you might experience sites looking not perfected to your browser..

i would suggest just changing the "windows" to something gibberish

sorry where do I change the 'windows' ? I don't see 'windows' anywhere in the useragent.override string that Ownaginatios originally posted. Am I looking in the wrong spot?

Thanks for your help

Originally Posted by Ownaginatios

The advantage is you don't "need" to have anti-virus. I never go anywhere on the internet that can be potentially damaging my computer. That built in windows defender thing already does a decent enough job.

Ok. I'm using the free version of AVG and Windows Defender so I should be fine. Thanks.

first make sure you dont have the override option in firefox.. then go to some website where you can check your useragent... i found one and its
www useragent org

useragent will look something like this depending on what youre using:
"Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4"

copy that string and put it in your overriden user agent with replacing windows with something else

Originally Posted by rift

just get user agent switcher, https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/59.

and at least change the date (Gecko/20050716) and version (Firefox/1.0.6) to something most recent. the more people that use this method, the more probable that theyll start identifying systems by passive tcp and not browser header.

Which they seem to have started doing already.

So I'm sitting in KTH now and I had to install CCAA to get online. It would seem they've turned on traffic shaping so I can't get online without CCAA now.

lol they must have seen this forum....

BUT there is still a way around this...

all you have to do is to get a tcp/ip obfuscator and make your os look like a linux machine... and since they also use javascript os detection, you should just turn off your javascript even though the login page says you need javascript to login..

and youre good to go...



but i dont advise you to do any of this since it might be against the mcmaster policy? soo... im just gonna say that someone not me tried it and it works lol.. and that the only reason he or she is doing it because the cisco clean access agent takes too long to load and that i dont need it to check my os since i keep everything updated...

-snaps

one more thing... mcmaster should forget about this cisco clean acces agent and focus on people in mac that have read/write shares on their computers...

if you log in to macconect and dont login to cisco clean acces agent yet, you can still see the local network and all the computers connected in the netmask... usually this is about 30 computers... and out of this 30 computers there are usually about 10 that have open shares to their computers and then there is about 3 computers that have write access to them...

anyone that doesnt even have to be from mac or have a mac login can scan the network and can easily access your computer without you even knowing it... so make sure you are not sharing anything.. or use a software firewall...

im surprised that the mac routers dont block these ports that allow seeing other computer shares

-snaps

agreed, the people with open shares are more of a threat than anything else. instead of requiring CCAA to be installed, they should just block people with ports 137/139 tcp open.

i dont think they use JS detection, ive seen people log in with just tcp and header spoofing.

Damn, seems like the user string "patch" and the user client switcher no longer work. I don't even see the point in this cisco thing. It doesn't really force you to install anti-virus or anything, and it's just as possible that there are a bunch of idiots on macs with shared folders holding windows viruses as well. Then again, anyone who goes into random shared folders and executes random files deserves to get a virus...

If the person/people that enforce(s) this cisco piece of shit is/are looking here, please, kill yourself(ves).

I can't help but feel that if this thread never existed, this would not have happened so soon.

I don't know, I heard on a few websites that Cisco fixed this "bug" a really long time ago (like 2005). It was bound to be patched up on the McMaster network sometime...