check out: http://tomii.erols.com/firewall.txt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Rittner [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2000 9:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Help with some IPCHAINS details
>
> Hi! I've recently begun experimenting with IPCHAINS in order to more fully
>
> lock down a couple Redhat 6.2 servers I have. Up until this point I've
> been
> running PortSentry, combined with TCP wrappers, and that seems to have
> worked just fine. However, I wanted some more control over the fine
> details. As a start, I set the input chain to allow access to some
> services
> such as SSH, WWW, and whatnot, by setting ACCEPT rules on those specific
> ports. Then I ended the chain with a rule to DENY everything that wasn't
> to
> one of those ports.
>
> This, of course, led to all kinds of problems. FTP no longer working, and
> so on. I'm not masquerading this box. It's stand-alone, so I don't think
> the ftp-masq module will help me. I guess the root of my question is, is
> it
> safe to leave all those ports above 1024, excluding the X ports, open? Do
> I
> have to for normal programs to work? I've had no problems locking down the
>
> ports below 1024, but that still leaves about 64,000 of them open, which
> makes me uneasy. Should I continue to run Sentry, sort of as a
> second-string protection? The firewall would let people in on port 31337
> say, but Sentry would nab it.
>
> Any thoughts would be appreciated. I've read the HOW-TOs, and while I now
> have a good idea of how IPCHAINS works, I'm still a bit fuzzy on it's
> correct and most secure implementation.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Redhat-list mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
