<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>RFC-792 on Netacoding | Cybersecurity, Assembly &amp; Network Research</title>
    <link>https://netacoding.com/tags/rfc-792/</link>
    <description>Recent content in RFC-792 on Netacoding | Cybersecurity, Assembly &amp; Network Research</description>
    
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://netacoding.com/tags/rfc-792/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>EnableICMPTimestampRep=0 Doesn&#39;t Work: Windows tcpip.sys ICMP Timestamp Bugs (Kernel RE)</title>
      <link>https://netacoding.com/posts/windows-icmp-timestamp-bugs/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://netacoding.com/posts/windows-icmp-timestamp-bugs/</guid>
      <description>EnableICMPTimestampRep=0 doesn&amp;#39;t stop Windows from sending ICMP Timestamp Replies. Ghidra RE of tcpip.sys 10.0.26100.8457 explains why — and finds a second RFC 792 byte-order violation.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
