Re: Connection attempts (& active ids)

From: Mike Silbersack (silby@silby.com)
Date: 04/26/01 

Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 21:48:21 -0500 (CDT)
From: Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>
To: David Goddard <goddard@acm.org>

On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, David Goddard wrote:

> Simply by being sat there listening to port 111, portsentry blocks
> several probably compromised systems a day from talking to my servers.
> Why should I not use it as a part of my security strategy?

Soooooo... if you weren't running portsentry, wouldn't they be talking to
a closed port, and hence leave you alone as well?

Mike "Silby" Silbersack

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-security" in the body of the message

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Best Plan of action for 2 forest.......
    ... PortQry reports the status of a port in one of the following ways: ... ..LISTENING This response indicates that a process is listening on the target ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: RealVNC
    ... If we are talking about RealVNC it goes this way ... Then there is default Java listening port on port 5800 on the client machine ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Cant join a domain
    ... Attempting to resolve name to IP address... ... TCP port 42: NOT LISTENING ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Cant join a domain
    ... Attempting to resolve name to IP address... ... TCP port 42: NOT LISTENING ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.active_directory)
  • Re: Cant connect to port 25 from another system
    ... The default sendmail config in RH/Fedora has been to only listen on the ... I previously edited the sendmail.mc file to be sure it is listening on ... Both netstat and nmap confirm that the system *is* listening on port ... When I attempt to telnet to port 25 the connection fails. ...
    (Fedora)