On 19.06.2018 22:24, john doe wrote:
> On 6/19/2018 10:04 PM, basti wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I try use use port knocking and would be happy to do this in ssh config
>> file.
>>
>> To open the port I can use ProxyCommand with an wrapper script like
>>
>> ProxyCommand bash -c 'wrapper.sh %h port1 port2
On 6/19/2018 10:30 PM, basti wrote:
On 19.06.2018 22:24, john doe wrote:
On 6/19/2018 10:04 PM, basti wrote:
Hello,
I try use use port knocking and would be happy to do this in ssh config
file.
To open the port I can use ProxyCommand with an wrapper script like
ProxyCommand bash -c 'wrapper
On 19.06.2018 22:24, john doe wrote:
> On 6/19/2018 10:04 PM, basti wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I try use use port knocking and would be happy to do this in ssh config
>> file.
>>
>> To open the port I can use ProxyCommand with an wrapper script like
>>
>> ProxyCommand bash -c 'wrapper.sh %h port1 port2
On 6/19/2018 10:04 PM, basti wrote:
Hello,
I try use use port knocking and would be happy to do this in ssh config
file.
To open the port I can use ProxyCommand with an wrapper script like
ProxyCommand bash -c 'wrapper.sh %h port1 port2 ... portX; nc %h %p'
so far so good.
But if I understand
Hi,
Richard Hector wrote:
> Does that mean that all files transferred
> will use your bandwidth, twice, and any enforcement authorities that
> come looking will assume you're the one doing it?
No. Two confused client programs will try to get each other to work.
At a rate of 10 bytes per second th
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Hi,
Hi
> Run your own port scan and shut down any insecure service that gets found.
Tried that and the firewall caught me and threw me out :-)
So I tried again, slower to stay out of the firewall's window, and the
only peculiar thing th
On 23/12/17 10:04, Thomas Schmitt wrote:
> Also cool: If file sharers show up, then keep one on hold until a second
> one calls. Then forward their requests to the respective other one.
> Two revenges taken for the price of one.
So you're acting as a proxy? Does that mean that all files transferre
On Fri 22 Dec 2017 at 20:33:23 +, Glenn English wrote:
> Debian Squeeze (?) very old anyway, Dell server, Juniper SSG5
> firewall. 1,000 miles away.
>
> I've started getting email from the firewall down there saying that it
> detected a port scan. Often enough of them to concern me -- several
Hi,
Glenn English wrote:
> port scan[s] ... Is there any way to stop them?
You can make their life harder by running slow servers at some ports.
It can be funny to watch with SSH attack attempts. Usually it lasts 10
or 15 seconds until the visitor gives up. Dumb ones repeat the attempt
with the n
On 12/22/17, Glenn English wrote:
> Debian Squeeze (?) very old anyway, Dell server, Juniper SSG5
> firewall. 1,000 miles away.
>
> I've started getting email from the firewall down there saying that it
> detected a port scan. Often enough of them to concern me -- several
> times a day.
>
> -- One
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 08:33:23PM +, Glenn English wrote:
> Debian Squeeze (?) very old anyway, Dell server, Juniper SSG5
> firewall. 1,000 miles away.
>
> I've started getting email from the firewall down there saying that it
> detected a port scan. Often enough of them to concern me -- seve
On Thursday 30,January,2014 05:24 AM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 29 ian 14, 17:42:53, lina wrote:
>>
>> # grep managed /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf
>> managed=false
>
> This means it should be safe to simply purge Network Manager unless...
>
>> I don't use wifi, if I need wifi, I
On Mi, 29 ian 14, 17:42:53, lina wrote:
>
> # grep managed /etc/NetworkManager/NetworkManager.conf
> managed=false
This means it should be safe to simply purge Network Manager unless...
> I don't use wifi, if I need wifi, I need "modprobe b43".
...you do need it for wireless. Not exactly sure
Hi.
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 14:39:37 +0800
lina wrote:
> sorry, I rebooted again after clearing something messy, here is the
> output with the new pid,
>
> # ps -eo pid,ppid,args | grep 2981
>
> 2981 1 dhclient -v -pf /run/dhclient.eth0.pid -lf
> /var/lib/dhcp/dhclient.eth0.leases eth0
> 65
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 21:44:36 +0800
lina wrote:
> BTW,
>
> :/etc/resolvconf# more interface-order
> # interface-order(5)
> lo.inet*
> lo.dnsmasq
> lo.pdnsd
> lo.!(pdns|pdns-recursor)
> lo
> tun*
> tap*
> hso*
> em+([0-9])?(_+([0-9]))*
> p+([0-9])p+([0-9])?(_+([0-9]))*
> eth*
> ath*
> wlan*
> ppp*
BTW,
:/etc/resolvconf# more interface-order
# interface-order(5)
lo.inet*
lo.dnsmasq
lo.pdnsd
lo.!(pdns|pdns-recursor)
lo
tun*
tap*
hso*
em+([0-9])?(_+([0-9]))*
p+([0-9])p+([0-9])?(_+([0-9]))*
eth*
ath*
wlan*
ppp*
*
These things seems so big for me to get a fully understanding.
--
To UNSUBSCRI
On Wednesday 29,January,2014 05:03 PM, Andrei POPESCU wrote:
> On Mi, 29 ian 14, 14:39:37, lina wrote:
>>
>> # dpkg -l 'network-manager*'
>
> Just for you info, you don't need root for this command (generally any
> command that just provides information).
>
>> Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purg
On Mi, 29 ian 14, 14:39:37, lina wrote:
>
> # dpkg -l 'network-manager*'
Just for you info, you don't need root for this command (generally any
command that just provides information).
> Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
> |
> Status=Not/Inst/Conf-files/Unpacked/halF-conf/Half-inst/trig
> Why, there's new output. Instead of 3 dhclients you've got 2.
:)
> PIDs are different from the last time too. That's a start, at least.
>
>
>> I don't know how to check further, the /proc/3321/ and /proc/3125 give
>> me no clue.
>
> ps -eo pid,ppid,args | grep 3321
> ps -eo pid,ppid,args |
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 13:57:01 +0800
lina wrote:
> I tried this, to get a better guarantee, I rebooted late, here is the
> new output:
>
> udp0 0 0.0.0.0:68 0.0.0.0:*
> 3321/dhclient
> udp0 0 0.0.0.0:68 0.0.0.0:*
> 3125/dhclient
On Wednesday 29,January,2014 12:56 PM, Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:55:52 +0800
> lina wrote:
>
>> I comment the last
>> iface eth0 inet dhcp
>
> Correct /etc/network/interfaces would be (notice that 'allow-hotplug'
> is above 'iface eth0'):
>
> # The loopback network interfac
Hi.
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:55:52 +0800
lina wrote:
> I comment the last
> iface eth0 inet dhcp
Correct /etc/network/interfaces would be (notice that 'allow-hotplug'
is above 'iface eth0'):
# The loopback network interface
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback
# The primary network interface
allow-h
On Wednesday 29,January,2014 11:15 AM, lina wrote:
>>> >> tcp6 0 0 :::143 :::*
>>> >> LISTEN 2731/couriertcpd
>> >
>> > Running IMAP server on a desktop is an uncommon thing.
>> > Do you really need it?
> I have no much idea how did I introduce this at the first pl
>> 2] I don't know why the dhclient occupy several ports to listen, and
>> what's a little annoying is that seems my IP address barely changed even
>> I reboot after one night.
>
>> tcp6 0 0 :::143 :::*
>> LISTEN 2731/couriertcpd
>
> Running IMAP server on a deskt
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 15:00:43 +0800
lina wrote:
> 1] about port 631, can I turn it off? since I only print very
> occasionally, I don't know the real purpose of cupsd;
As others said, listening port 631 on loopback interface is not a
problem.
>
> 2] I don't know why the dhclient occupy several
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 09:53:05PM +0800, lina wrote:
>
> >
> > STOP NTP!
> > ntpd is currently abused as a DDOS attack vector.
> > If your ntpd responds to ntpdc -n -c monlst
>
> Oh it responds, responds badly:
>
> $ ntpdc -n -c monlst < 172.21.100.159 >
> bash: syntax error near unexpected t
On Tuesday 28,January,2014 09:32 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:
> Just check if the following lines are present and active in your
> ntp.conf:
>
> restrict -4 default kod nomodify notrap nopeer noquery
> restrict -6 default kod nomodify notrap nopeer noquery
Thanks, they are.
# more ntp.conf | grep rest
>
> STOP NTP!
> ntpd is currently abused as a DDOS attack vector.
> If your ntpd responds to ntpdc -n -c monlst
Oh it responds, responds badly:
$ ntpdc -n -c monlst < 172.21.100.159 >
bash: syntax error near unexpected token `newline'
$ ntpdc -n -c 172.21.100.159
***Command `172.21.100.159' u
Henning Follmann wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 01:43:17PM +0800, lina wrote:
>> I read something online, and wonder:
>> 1] shall I close the port 123
>> 2] disable ipv6
>>
>> Shall I follow the advice from https://wiki.debian.org/DebianIPv6 to
>> turn off the ipv6 in wheezy as in squeeze,
>
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 01:43:17PM +0800, lina wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read something online, and wonder:
> 1] shall I close the port 123
> 2] disable ipv6
>
> Shall I follow the advice from https://wiki.debian.org/DebianIPv6 to
> turn off the ipv6 in wheezy as in squeeze,
>
> Thanks,
>
STOP NTP!
Hi
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 03:00:43PM +0800, lina wrote:
> >> I read something online, and wonder:
> >> 1] shall I close the port 123
> >
> > Probably you should, unless you're providing ntp to some other hosts.s
>
> I have disabled the ntp. Here is other two things:
>
> 1] about port 631, can
On 28/01/14 18:00, lina wrote:
>>> I read something online, and wonder:
>>> 1] shall I close the port 123
>>
>> Probably you should, unless you're providing ntp to some other hosts.s
>
> I have disabled the ntp. Here is other two things:
>
> 1] about port 631, can I turn it off? since I only prin
>> I read something online, and wonder:
>> 1] shall I close the port 123
>
> Probably you should, unless you're providing ntp to some other hosts.s
I have disabled the ntp. Here is other two things:
1] about port 631, can I turn it off? since I only print very
occasionally, I don't know the real
Hi.
On Tue, 28 Jan 2014 13:43:17 +0800
lina wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I read something online, and wonder:
> 1] shall I close the port 123
Probably you should, unless you're providing ntp to some other hosts.
> 2] disable ipv6
Is there something malfunctioning on this host? Or is there any service
t
Hi there,
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 11:08:15PM -0500, jug...@lavabit.com wrote:
[...]
[openSSH]
sequence= 7000,8000,9000
seq_timeout = 5
command = /sbin/iptables -A INPUT -I 6 -p tcp --dport 22 -j
ACCEPT
tcpflags= syn
cmd_timeout = 25
[...]
[closeS
On Wed, 28 Dec 2011 11:15:39 +0200
Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Ma, 27 dec 11, 22:37:16, Celejar wrote:
> >
> > FTR, I don't think that normal bittorrent usage actually needs more
> > than one port.
>
> As far as I know you need a separate port for DHT.
Okay - I was just responding to Bob's stat
On Ma, 27 dec 11, 22:37:16, Celejar wrote:
>
> FTR, I don't think that normal bittorrent usage actually needs more
> than one port.
As far as I know you need a separate port for DHT.
Kind regards,
Andrei
--
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/m
On Mon, 26 Dec 2011 11:00:37 -0700
Bob Proulx wrote:
...
> Yes to both. It is allowing you to specify a range of ports. For
> something like bittorrent you would need to specify a range of ports.
> Since you only have one port you should give the same port number to
> both ends of the range.
On 27/12/11 10:51, hvw59601 wrote:
> Scott Ferguson wrote:
>> On 27/12/11 05:00, Andrei Popescu wrote:
>>> On Lu, 26 dec 11, 09:32:51, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
I have laptop -> router -> internet. The router is Westell
A90-750015-07. I am using Verizon DSL High Speed Internet.
>>
Scott Ferguson wrote:
On 27/12/11 05:00, Andrei Popescu wrote:
On Lu, 26 dec 11, 09:32:51, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
I have laptop -> router -> internet. The router is Westell A90-750015-07. I
am using Verizon DSL High Speed Internet.
I have set up the apache server on port 8088. It works
On 27/12/11 05:00, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> On Lu, 26 dec 11, 09:32:51, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
>> I have laptop -> router -> internet. The router is Westell A90-750015-07. I
>> am using Verizon DSL High Speed Internet.
>>
>> I have set up the apache server on port 8088. It works internally bu
On Lu, 26 dec 11, 21:39:27, Victor Nitu wrote:
> On 12/26/2011 08:00 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
>
> > This is one reason I welcome the switch to IPv6.
>
> Just out of curiosity: can you be more specific on this issue? (please
> excuse me for being a bit off-topic).
As far as I understand the main
On Lu, 26 dec 11, 15:24:16, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
>
> The various posts on the internet suggested that Verizon blocks port 80. To
> eliminate that, I was using 8088. I just now checked... the web server works
> on port 80 too!
I meant that it is not really useful to change the port *both
Andrei Popescu wrote:
>
>> For Global PortStart, Global PortEnd should I choose 8088?
>> For Base HostPort, should I choose 8088?
>
> Yes. Note: since I have to mess with the ports when doing the port
> forwarding I prefer to let the service always run on it's default port.
> Makes things easier
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
>> In snapshot3.jpeg, the field (1) "Enter a name for the custom service:"
>> can be any random name. But what about (2)? Should I choose "Port
>> Forwarding" or "Port Triggering".
>
> Select Port Forwarding. Port Triggering is used to dynamical
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 12/26/2011 08:00 PM, Andrei Popescu wrote:
> This is one reason I welcome the switch to IPv6.
>
Just out of curiosity: can you be more specific on this issue? (please
excuse me for being a bit off-topic).
TIA,
Victor
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
Tony Baldwin wrote:
> Bob Proulx wrote:
> > After setting this up it is possible that the port forwarding will
> > only work from the external network inbound to your internal network.
> > ...
>
> I have server running on a little machine here, and I have a domain
> forwarded from dydns: http://to
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 11:00:37AM -0700, Bob Proulx wrote:
> Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
> > In snapshot3.jpeg, the field (1) "Enter a name for the custom service:" can
> > be any random name. But what about (2)? Should I choose "Port Forwarding"
> > or "Port Triggering".
>
clippage
> q
> Aft
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
> In snapshot3.jpeg, the field (1) "Enter a name for the custom service:" can
> be any random name. But what about (2)? Should I choose "Port Forwarding"
> or "Port Triggering".
Select Port Forwarding. Port Triggering is used to dynamically make a
selection based u
On Lu, 26 dec 11, 09:32:51, Kamaraju S Kusumanchi wrote:
> I have laptop -> router -> internet. The router is Westell A90-750015-07. I
> am using Verizon DSL High Speed Internet.
>
> I have set up the apache server on port 8088. It works internally but not
> externally. So http://192.168.1.21:80
Zhang Weiwu wrote at 2010-09-13 02:23 -0500:
> Thank you! Now that I tried it, te apf-client package proved very useful
> in my case. I followed your advice almost a year later because I was too
> busy with daily business and kept your email as "marked for personal
> todo" for a year or so.
Excell
Hi.
On 2009年11月12日 07:53, green wrote:
> Zhang Weiwu wrote at 2009-11-10 20:36 -0600:
>
>> Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
>> masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
>> local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to ac
Zhang Weiwu wrote at 2009-11-10 20:36 -0600:
> Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
> masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
> local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to access the
> remote office and hosts in that office,
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36:20AM +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> The problem of this solution is security. I do not want to grant shell
> access of local_server to remote_server. What would you recommend me
> to do in this case? I could try to limit access of the account used by
> remote server ssh
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
> masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
> local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to access the
> remote office and hosts in that o
Alex Samad wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36:20AM +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
>
>> The problem of this solution is security. I do not want to grant shell
>> access of local_server to remote_server. What would you recommend me to
>> do in this case? I could try to limit access of the account u
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 10:36:20AM +0800, Zhang Weiwu wrote:
> Hello. I have a remote server inside a remote office covered by NAT
> masquerade where port forwarding not possible, and a local server in my
> local office not covered by NAT masquerade. In order to access the
> remote office and hosts
Hi,
I think is better you use just:
# iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol tcp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
-j DNAT --to-destination 172.25.1.5:27012 --verbose
# iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol udp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
-j DNAT --to-destination 172.25.1.5:27012 --verb
Hi,
I think is better you use just:
# iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol tcp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
-j DNAT --to-destination 172.25.1.5:27012 --verbose
# iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol udp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
-j DNAT --to-destination 172.25.1.5:27012 --verb
At 1145804173 past the epoch, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:11:14AM -0500, Forrest Smith
> wrote:
> > The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this
> > for you:
>
> Does shorewall find and install the missing kernel
> modules. wherever they are? Or does it just use
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> But it doesn't work.
>
> Lines like
>
> iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol tcp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
> -j DNAT --to-destination 172.25.1.5:27012 --verbose
> iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING --protocol udp -d 216.138.195.194 --dport 27012
> -j DNAT --t
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:36:15PM -0700, charles norwood wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 14:56 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:11:14AM -0500, Forrest Smith wrote:
> > > The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this for you:
> > >
> > > apt-get install shore
On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 14:56 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:11:14AM -0500, Forrest Smith wrote:
> > The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this for you:
> >
> > apt-get install shorewall
> >
> > F.S
>
> Does shorewall find and install the missing kernel m
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 14:56:13 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
> Does shorewall find and install the missing kernel modules. wherever
> they are? Or does it just use iptables, whose docs say it tries to
> load them (but it is evidently not succeeding).
>
> I *have* the set of iptables
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:11:14AM -0500, Forrest Smith wrote:
> The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this for you:
>
> apt-get install shorewall
>
> F.S
Does shorewall find and install the missing kernel modules. wherever
they are? Or does it just use iptables, whose docs say it
The folks on the Shorewall project have done all this for you:
apt-get install shorewall
F.S
On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 09:27:21AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm running sarge on a vintage Pentium as a gateway machine for a home
> network.
>
> My machine was cracked last December and I r
On 2004-07-02, Antony penned:
> Hi all,
>
> If I have a router running iptables with NAT for a private IP network,
> there are two options if I want to have a public email server on the
> private network... 1) Set up an email server on the router that
> relays all mail to the private server.2) Por
On Fri, 2 Jul 2004 13:43:58 +0100 (BST), Antony <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1) Set up an email server on the router that relays all mail to the
> private server.2) Port forward (DNAT) port 25 to the private server.
>
> I don't like port forwarding, as it's always seemed like a kind of bodge,
> b
On Tue, Dec 16, 2003 at 09:06:44PM +0800, Brendan Bache wrote:
> I'm running debian woody on my gateway with the ipmasq package installed
> and I need to do some port forwarding. For instance, I need to forward
> some ports for BitTorrent running on a box on my LAN so I created a file
> /etc/ipmasq
On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 04:35, Jerome Lacoste wrote:
> Hi,
>
> a friend of mine has problems accessing a mail server from his company
> but he can access my server.
>
> I thought that I could enable port forwarding to solve his problem.
>
> E.g.
>
> D-S-MS
>
> He wants to access the mail serve
On 07/01/2003 09:32:48 Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
>> Hi Peter!
>>
>> You wrote:
>>
>> > i'm about to set up port forwarding on a firewall to be able to reach
>> > some hosts on the lan from the outside. i wish to use iptables
prerouting
>> > rules. my question is, is there a way to detect the port
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 04:32:48PM +0200, Bas Zoetekouw wrote:
> PS: debian-security is not meant for discussing securing your
> firewall, but rather for reporting security vulnerabilities in
> Debian packages. The debian-user mailing list is more
> appropraite for this kind of qu
Hi Peter!
You wrote:
> i'm about to set up port forwarding on a firewall to be able to reach
> some hosts on the lan from the outside. i wish to use iptables prerouting
> rules. my question is, is there a way to detect the port forwarding,
> and/or get info about the host i forward to (ip addres
On Tue, Dec 10, 2002 at 04:15:38AM -0500, Shawn Lamson wrote:
| Hey all -
|
| I am working on getting my box to serve a webpage; it seems ok with apache2 running
|(btw not the debian packaged version - it seemed "whacked") but I have to use port
|123.321.89.98:8000 b/c I can't seem to get anythi
On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 16:00, David Cureton wrote:
> Sound like your ISP is blocking port 80. Some ISP's are real anal about
> serving web traffic over there cable modem networks.
For example, soon after the Code Red outbreak died down, Cox Cable
started blocking port 80. Up until then, there was
Sound like your ISP is blocking port 80. Some ISP's are real anal about
serving web traffic over there cable modem networks.
Another graphical tool for seeing what is going on on network ports is called
'ethereal' It uses tcpdump as the underlying packet sniffer but provides a
graphical front e
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 12:39:11 + (UTC)
"Miquel van Smoorenburg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Shawn Lamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >http://www.cablemodemhelp.com/portscan.htm
> >worked - it said port 80 is closed, but how can i tell if there is
> >something
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Shawn Lamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>http://www.cablemodemhelp.com/portscan.htm
>worked - it said port 80 is closed, but how can i tell if there is
>something on my computer closed it or if the ISP closes it? Maybe a
>program that will tell me it has recieved r
On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 04:54, Shawn Lamson wrote:
> http://www.cablemodemhelp.com/portscan.htm
> worked - it said port 80 is closed, but how can i tell if there is
something on my computer closed it or if the ISP closes it? Maybe a
program that will tell me it has recieved requests or packets on t
On 10 Dec 2002 04:46:38 -0500
Ludwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 04:15, Shawn Lamson wrote:
> > Hey all -
> >
> > I am working on getting my box to serve a webpage; it seems ok with
> apache2 running (btw not the debian packaged version - it seemed
> "whacked") but I have t
On Tue, 2002-12-10 at 04:15, Shawn Lamson wrote:
> Hey all -
>
> I am working on getting my box to serve a webpage; it seems ok with
apache2 running (btw not the debian packaged version - it seemed
"whacked") but I have to use port 123.321.89.98:8000 b/c I can't seem to
get anything from port 80..
On Tuesday 29 October 2002 02:31 am, Jean Christophe ANDRÉ wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> ben écrivait :
> > you're missing the point. running a portmap daemon is the only
> > vulnerability that the 111 port scans are attempting to exploit.
>
> We are not looking for vulnerability.
> We are looking for what
On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 12:23:58PM -0700, Vineet Kumar wrote:
| * Paul Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020603 08:34]:
| > iptables just confuses me at times.
| >
| > I'm trying to figure out how to forward all packets hitting this machine
| > on one port to a port on another machine inside my network
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 07:14:31PM +0200, prover wrote:
> > I'M NOT MEMER OF YOUR MAILING LISTS.
>
> what's a MEMER?
>
> > WHY THIS MAILS COME TO ME?
> > EVERY DAY COME TO ME 200 MAILS FROM YOUR MAILING LISTS.
> >
> > CAN YOU DO SOMETHING WITH IT?
>
> Do
On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 07:49:39PM +0200, Rudy Gevaert wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 07:14:31PM +0200, prover wrote:
> > I'M NOT MEMER OF YOUR MAILING LISTS.
I got tired of this guy, so I bounce all his 'bounces'.
This procmail recipe does it:
:0
* ^X-Envelope-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL
On Tue, Jun 04, 2002 at 07:14:31PM +0200, prover wrote:
> I'M NOT MEMER OF YOUR MAILING LISTS.
what's a MEMER?
> WHY THIS MAILS COME TO ME?
> EVERY DAY COME TO ME 200 MAILS FROM YOUR MAILING LISTS.
>
> CAN YOU DO SOMETHING WITH IT?
Do you got dirt in your eyes? Every e-mail from this list has
I'M NOT MEMER OF YOUR MAILING LISTS.
WHY THIS MAILS COME TO ME?
EVERY DAY COME TO ME 200 MAILS FROM YOUR MAILING LISTS.
CAN YOU DO SOMETHING WITH IT?
THANK YOU.
- Original Message -
From: "Eric G. Miller"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2002 3:34 AM
Subject: Re:
On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 11:21:28AM -0700, ben wrote:
> On Monday 03 June 2002 05:01 am, Paul Johnson wrote:
>
> hey ballo, for the last couple of days, your posts are showing up as msg.pgp
> attachments; i.e., the attachments have to be viewed in order to see the msg.
Probably a function of the
On Mon, Jun 03, 2002 at 05:01:31AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> iptables just confuses me at times.
iptables confuses me all the time :))
> I'm trying to figure out how to forward all packets hitting this
> machine
> on one port to a port on another machine inside my network. I'm kinda
> stumpe
* Paul Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020603 08:34]:
> iptables just confuses me at times.
>
> I'm trying to figure out how to forward all packets hitting this machine
> on one port to a port on another machine inside my network. I'm kinda
> stumped.
$IPTABLES -t nat -A PREROUTING -i $EXT_IF -p tc
On Monday 03 June 2002 05:01 am, Paul Johnson wrote:
hey ballo, for the last couple of days, your posts are showing up as msg.pgp
attachments; i.e., the attachments have to be viewed in order to see the msg.
ben
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". T
>
> It's complaining:
>
> pcilib: Cannot open /proc/bus/pci/0b/00.0
> lspci: Unable to read 64 bytes of configuration space.
>
> I check the /proc/bus/pci directory, and there I find:
>
> mobilemcp:~# ls -l /proc/bus/pci
> total 0
> dr-xr-xr-x2 root root0 Feb 20 11:28 00
> d
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 08:20:42AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> On 20-Feb-2002 Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> > I've asked in the past and never got an answer that worked. I'm at a
> > point again where I want to get my Gateway port replicator to work with
> > my laptop. I can use everything o
On Wed, Feb 20, 2002 at 11:31:00AM -0500, Ed Lawson wrote:
> Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
>
> >I've asked in the past and never got an answer that worked. I'm at a
> >point again where I want to get my Gateway port replicator to work with
> >my laptop. I can use everything on it but the PCMCIA slots. H
Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
I've asked in the past and never got an answer that worked. I'm at a
point again where I want to get my Gateway port replicator to work with
my laptop. I can use everything on it but the PCMCIA slots. How do I
tell linux to use the two slots that are in the replicator as
On 20-Feb-2002 Darryl L. Pierce wrote:
> I've asked in the past and never got an answer that worked. I'm at a
> point again where I want to get my Gateway port replicator to work with
> my laptop. I can use everything on it but the PCMCIA slots. How do I
> tell linux to use the two slots that are
* Paul 'Baloo' Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
>
> @Home tech support's KB doesn't list 25 as being blocked (as of two
> weeks ago, when I last worked there).
@home began blocking ports 25, 80, 109 and 110 on my system about two
months ago. i switched to a DSL provider and haven't had o
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, nate wrote:
> are you on a cable modem? sounds like you are if your from
> @home.com .many @home networks have port 25 filtered
> along with a bunch of other ports. you may want to email
> @home support to get a list of ports that are filtered on
> the network segment your
On Mon, 26 Nov 2001, Joe M Mar wrote:
> I am using Exim and I am able to send messages but not able to receive
> them. I can telnet to port 25 locally but I can't from a remote
> computer. I think this is the problem as to why I am unable to recieve
> email. I wonder how i can enable this. Docu
On Mon, 2001-11-26 at 17:48, Joe M Mar wrote:
> At 04:08 PM 11/26/01 -0600, you wrote:
>
> The output is:
> tcp0 0 *:smtp *:*
> LISTEN 263/inetd
> The difference is 'LISTEN 263 as opposed to what you said LISTEN 19551.
> Anything wrong with my output?
Nope thats
1 - 100 of 230 matches
Mail list logo
