Re: UDP to port 1027
- From: "GEO" Me@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 19:40:52 GMT
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006 14:23:52 -0500, ibuprofin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Moe Trin) wrote:
People seem to forget that there really isn't this benevolent entity
out on the net that looks after your computer, and informs you when
something is wrong. Microsoft does not send security bulletins to
every windoze user in the world, any more than any other company. The
only ones doing it are the spammers, who can also get you a deal on
these blue pills for your computer.
My impression on this point is that the heavy marketing, mixed
within certain aspects of the culture, has been a cause of this
problem. How many people still want to believe that certain figures of
authority only have their best interests at heart, from politicians to
priests. Some people find emotionally hard to distrust those that are
supposed to be trusted.
Just curious - why are you using this old stuff? Especially in the windoze
world, there are more exploits out there than trees in Canada.
I had already got used to MS-DOS before moving to Win 3.1, and I did
not have access to anything else for a while. By the time I got Win 95
I found it a bit complicated in comparison and the more I looked at it
the less I liked the idea of creating an OS that assumed that users
should not have as much control and that the company will do it for
them -they know better what it is that you wanted to do.
If I had had access at that time to Linux, I probably would have
moved to it, and still I might do that instead of mving to the newer
versions of Windows. But I don't like that the newer versions of Linux
seem to be trying to copy the newer versions of Windows. I prefer the
idea of having one program for each task, not one program that is
supposed to do everything.
As you say, it seems that Win 95/98 have had plenty of exploits,
which might make moving to Linux easier than trying to keep track of
all the existing problems with Win 95/98 and its applications.
Some of the other messages which I was refering to, but I did not have a
copy at hand were like this:
1 IP 4.79.142.202 ->My address len 602 prot 6
0 IP My address ->4.79.142.202 len 40 prot 6
Would that be a ping?
<snip>
While this is lacking information, all that can be said it that the first<snip>
packet is from www.grc.com - ....
Were you running a
test at "Shields Up" or merely connecting to the website?
Right, I forgot that I went from a link in
<http://linux-sec.net/Audit/nmap.test.gwif.html> (mentioned by
Sebastian Gottschalk a few days ago) to www.grc.com You are good at
using limited information. :)
Thank you.
Geo
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: UDP to port 1027
- From: Moe Trin
- Re: UDP to port 1027
- From: Bit Twister
- Re: UDP to port 1027
- References:
- Re: UDP to port 1027
- From: GEO
- Re: UDP to port 1027
- From: Moe Trin
- Re: UDP to port 1027
- From: GEO
- Re: UDP to port 1027
- From: Moe Trin
- Re: UDP to port 1027
- Prev by Date: Re: not listening
- Next by Date: Re: UDP to port 1027
- Previous by thread: Re: UDP to port 1027
- Next by thread: Re: UDP to port 1027
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|