Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[enhancement] Is there a way to have the listen address and the address used in the UNC path to be different? #75

Open
dms1lva opened this issue Feb 19, 2024 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@dms1lva
Copy link

dms1lva commented Feb 19, 2024

Is there a way to have the listen address and the address used in the UNC path to be different?

I need to perform port forwarding to receive the connection so the listen address and the address in the UNC path are different.

@p0dalirius p0dalirius self-assigned this Feb 20, 2024
@p0dalirius
Copy link
Owner

I should add it yes

I will very soon

@p0dalirius p0dalirius changed the title Question: Is there a way to have the listen address and the address used in the UNC path to be different? [enhancement] Is there a way to have the listen address and the address used in the UNC path to be different? Feb 20, 2024
@p0rtL6
Copy link

p0rtL6 commented Jan 17, 2025

Is this referring to how in the scan/fuzz modes the path is generated to be the same as the local listener that is created? To my understanding, in the coerce mode, the provided listener IP is only used in the path generation, so you should be able to set that to whatever you need. So the fix for this should just be allowing an option for the fuzz and scan modes that provides a user defined path IP while still setting up the listener on whatever local IP is found?

p0rtL6 pushed a commit to p0rtL6/Coercer that referenced this issue Jan 17, 2025
@p0rtL6
Copy link

p0rtL6 commented Jan 17, 2025

I made a tentative change to add this functionality, here is the commit. Does this look right?

@p0dalirius
Copy link
Owner

It looks right yes, can you create a pull request?

p0rtL6 added a commit to p0rtL6/Coercer that referenced this issue Jan 21, 2025
p0rtL6 pushed a commit to p0rtL6/Coercer that referenced this issue Jan 21, 2025
@p0rtL6 p0rtL6 mentioned this issue Jan 21, 2025
@p0rtL6
Copy link

p0rtL6 commented Jan 21, 2025

I made a pull request, this one is branched from the current master, so it should be able to merge just by itself, I separately merged in the changes to the refactor branch I already created, so if you decide to approve that request, the changes should already be done in there. Let me know if I need to change anything else.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants