Re: port 0 not stealth
From: Mordicus (mordicus_at_anonymous.com)
Date: 12/09/04
- Next message: Lars M. Hansen: "Re: port 0 not stealth"
- Previous message: Triffid: "Re: port 0 not stealth"
- In reply to: Lars M. Hansen: "Re: port 0 not stealth"
- Next in thread: \: "Re: port 0 not stealth"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2004 03:41:02 +0100
Lars, you again ?! Thank you !!! Thank to Triffid for his help too.
All your posts are very clear I will not care any more about this closed
"ghost"
port...
>>There is no port 0.
>>There is no "stealth."
You convinced me, it needs no more explanation ! I can go to sleep... :-)
"Lars M. Hansen" <badnews@hansenonline.net> wrote in message
news:113fr0pb8vuue5rc4r3md7f119q4eukarj@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 16:59:31 +0100, LB spoketh
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>After reinstalling my firewall (I tried a new beta version of my firewall,
>>but was not satisfied and came back to old official version), I made a
>>check
>>on "shield up" Gibson site to probe my ports. Strangely, port 0 is no more
>>"stealth", but "closed". So the test result is "FAILED". What could
>>happened
>>and how to make the port 0 "stealth" again ? Is it dangerous ? It was
>>always
>>stealth before...
>>
>>Thank you !
>>
>
> There is no port 0.
> There is no "stealth."
>
>
> Lars M. Hansen
> http://www.hansenonline.net
> (replace 'badnews' with 'news' in e-mail address)
- Next message: Lars M. Hansen: "Re: port 0 not stealth"
- Previous message: Triffid: "Re: port 0 not stealth"
- In reply to: Lars M. Hansen: "Re: port 0 not stealth"
- Next in thread: \: "Re: port 0 not stealth"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|