On Sun, 6 Oct 2002 09:22:05 -0700
ronald j roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My logs are full of attempts from this address. How can I pull an
> address to send a complaint? What are they trying to do? And is
> there any way to block this completely?
> thanks in advance
>
> Security Violations
>
From: "ronald j roy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> What are they trying to do?
> Oct 6 09:00:11 ralone kernel: Packet log: input DENY ppp0 PROTO=6
> +202.72.168.81:2657 66.122.19.40:6667 L=48 S=0x00 I=21801 F=0x4000 T=112
> SYN
> +(#1)
from "66.122.19.40:6667" you see the use of port 6667, that is a co
If this only happens once or twice, I wouldn't send a complaint, it
could be a valid mistake. But if you want to complain:
202.72.168.81 is the host this coming from. Use whois to figure out who
owns the netblock. (hint.. is appears to be an australian isp user). S
On Sun, 2002-10-06 at 12:
You are blocking it already it looks like internet relay chat do you use
this a chat program?
Simon
On Sun, 2002-10-06 at 17:22, ronald j roy wrote:
> My logs are full of attempts from this address. How can I pull an
> address to send a complaint? What are they trying to do? And is there
> any w
My logs are full of attempts from this address. How can I pull an
address to send a complaint? What are they trying to do? And is there
any way to block this completely?
thanks in advance
Security Violations
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Oct 6 09:00:08 ralone kernel: Packet log: input DENY ppp0 PROTO=6
+2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06-Oct-2002/11:06 -0700, Ronald J Roy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>My logs are full of attempts from this address. What is this person
>trying to do? How can I pull an address from this? And is there any way
>to completely block it?
[snip]
Accordin
My logs are full of attempts from this address. What is this person
trying to do? How can I pull an address from this? And is there any way
to completely block it?
Security Violations
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Oct 6 10:45:03 ralone kernel: Packet log: input DENY ppp0 PROTO=6
+209.244.215.12:1934 66.12
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 27 November 2001 06:12 pm, Peter Kiem wrote:
> Hi Bob,
>
> > Logwatch does not have all the features of Logcheck. Anyone
> > running Logcheck on 7.0 or later versions of Red Hat?
>
> Red Hat 7.1 machine:
>
>
> Hi Bob,
>
> > Logwatch does not have all the features of Logcheck. Anyone
> > running Logcheck on 7.0 or later versions of Red Hat?
>
> Red Hat 7.1 machine:
>
> # rpm -q logcheck
> logcheck-1.1.1-1
>
> --
Peter,
I went ahead and downloaded log
Hi Bob,
> Logwatch does not have all the features of Logcheck. Anyone
> running Logcheck on 7.0 or later versions of Red Hat?
Red Hat 7.1 machine:
# rpm -q logcheck
logcheck-1.1.1-1
--
Regards,
+---+-+
| Peter Kiem|
for the switch?
Since 7.2 the powertools have been dropped. I do run logcheck on a 7.1
system. It's on the powertools CD. I think the reason portsentry and logcheck
were dropped is a licensing issue. Get the source yourself (URL?) or rebuild
the src.rpm
Logwatch although that mostly has to do with the fact that I
am not familiar with Logwatch. It does appear though that
Logwatch does not have all the features of Logcheck. Anyone
running Logcheck on 7.0 or later versions of Red Hat?
Thanks
Bob
___
Redhat
Hal Burgiss wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 05:15:29PM -0500, Bret Hughes wrote:
> > logcheck keeps spitting out these messages but not every hour like I
> > thought originally. I thought it was a windows box but now I am
> > thingking it might be my laptop. I did n
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 05:15:29PM -0500, Bret Hughes wrote:
> logcheck keeps spitting out these messages but not every hour like I
> thought originally. I thought it was a windows box but now I am
> thingking it might be my laptop. I did not see these over the weekend
> and may ha
On Fri, May 26, 2000 at 10:59:31AM +1000, Dan Horth wrote:
> Hiya - two staged problem / question here...
>
> we use logcheck to monitor our logfiles and are getting a lot of
> errors like this being reported:
>
> May 26 10:31:43 named[511]: bad referral (228.165.in-addr.arpa
Hiya - two staged problem / question here...
we use logcheck to monitor our logfiles and are getting a lot of
errors like this being reported:
May 26 10:31:43 named[511]: bad referral (228.165.in-addr.arpa !<
132.228.165.IN-ADDR.ARPA)
May 26 10:31:45 named[511]: bad referral (228.165
Sorry for the OT post but the BB list is not helping.
Email me privately please
TIA
Steve
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe"
as the Subject.
17 matches
Mail list logo
