Re: NBT vs SMB - security?
From: Oli Restorick [MVP] (oli_at_mvps.org)
Date: 06/08/04
- Next message: John O'Donnell: "Re: Microsoft Security Bulletins for June 2004"
- Previous message: Robert Chao: "Re: Microsoft Security Bulletins for June 2004"
- In reply to: Gary: "NBT vs SMB - security?"
- Next in thread: S. Pidgorny
: "Re: NBT vs SMB - security?" - Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2004 19:15:46 +0100
If you disable NetBT, that gets rid of a lot of the legacy file sharing
code.
Have you thought about using IPSec or IP Filtering to block access?
Regards
Oli
"Gary" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:1972a01c44d4d$d45446d0$a301280a@phx.gbl...
> Microsoft advise that NBT (NetBIOS over TCP) and SMB (445)
> should be disabled on machines that are in less protected
> networks. I have a network which has a firewall permiting
> only web access to a web server behind it. I would like to
> also disable NBT and SMB on this machine to limit attack
> vectors. However the web server needs to be able to access
> a file share on another adjacent machine so this will not
> be possible? If I were to disable one of these transports
> over the other which one is more secure?
- Next message: John O'Donnell: "Re: Microsoft Security Bulletins for June 2004"
- Previous message: Robert Chao: "Re: Microsoft Security Bulletins for June 2004"
- In reply to: Gary: "NBT vs SMB - security?"
- Next in thread: S. Pidgorny
: "Re: NBT vs SMB - security?" - Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|