November 2002 21:57
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Fwd: Re: Does Masquerade open netbios-ns port.
>
>
> I use iptables and have blocked all the netbios ports, but
> they are open when I run port scan as root, else as user they
> are filtered.
>
--
work-scripts/ifcfg-eth1 which is my wan card. Is> there any other places it must be set. My isp is bluecom.no and I> got this netbios related line when running tcpdump.> > a217.118.65.180 > 162.45.10.77.netbios-ns> > where the leftmost ip is my wan card ip from my isp.> > B
essage-
> From: linux power [mailto:linuxpower2002@;yahoo.no]
> Sent: Wednesday, 6 November 2002 06:46
> To: redhat mail list
> Subject: Fwd: Re: Does Masquerade open netbios-ns port.
>
>
> I set the GATEWAY=x.x.x.x in
> /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth1 which is my w
ning tcpdump.
>
> a217.118.65.180 > 162.45.10.77.netbios-ns
>
> where the leftmost ip is my wan card ip from my isp.
>
> But the rightmost ip is changing all the time so I was wonder if that
> netbios-ns is through my maschine and if that port is open?
With tcpdump output, it is a lit
I set the GATEWAY=x.x.x.x in /etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth1 which is my wan card. Is there any other places it must be set. My isp is bluecom.no and I got this netbios related line when running tcpdump.
a217.118.65.180 > 162.45.10.77.netbios-ns
where the leftmost ip is my wan card
Ok. Thanks.
I'll think I had to read about blocking the gateway since I dont know how to do it.
Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 04:13:50PM +0100, linux power wrote:> Anyway I ran port scan and found ports 137-139 open as root,> > but not when I ran port scan as user,
On Tue, Nov 05, 2002 at 04:13:50PM +0100, linux power wrote:
> Anyway I ran port scan and found ports 137-139 open as root,
>
> but not when I ran port scan as user, I have closed the ports in iptables.
If you are having trouble with these ports, I would suggest explicitly
blocking them at the ga
Anyway I ran port scan and found ports 137-139 open as root,
but not when I ran port scan as user, I have closed the ports in iptables.http://home.no.net/~knutove/knut_ove_hauge_kuren.htmPrøv betaversjonen av den nye Yahoo! Mail
Nytt design, enklere å bruke, alltid tilgang til Adressebok, Kalender
On Thu, 3 May 2001, John Aldrich wrote:
> Ok..:-) Just checking. :-) There was a dsl machine that sent me about half a
> dozen of these puppies to my desktop machine at work (NO samba! ) For the
> life of me I can't figure out why that machine was even trying to talk to my
> workstation... so I
On Thursday 03 May 2001 09:16 pm, you wrote:
>
> Netbios is the sunrpc of Windows :). Windows machines are subject to a
> number of netbios vulnerabilities. Probing for netbios is also a good way
> to figure out if you are a Windows or Unix server, and if the systems
> administrator has a clue or
On Thursday 03 May 2001 09:07 pm, you wrote:
>
> Not on Linux machines, as far as I know, but on a Windows machine with
> file/printer sharing turned on, it can be interesting. You will also
> see it from Windows machines that are not running a firewall, that are
> telling any other windows machi
On Thu, 3 May 2001, John Aldrich wrote:
> Are there any known vulnerabilities in RH 6.2 (if you're not running bind)
> for netbios-ns? I've noticed a rash of "dgram to netbios-ns" in my logfiles
> lately and I"m wondering if it's because of some known vuln
On Thu, 3 May 2001, John Aldrich wrote:
> Are there any known vulnerabilities in RH 6.2 (if you're not running bind)
> for netbios-ns? I've noticed a rash of "dgram to netbios-ns" in my logfiles
> lately and I"m wondering if it's because of some known vuln
Are there any known vulnerabilities in RH 6.2 (if you're not running bind)
for netbios-ns? I've noticed a rash of "dgram to netbios-ns" in my logfiles
lately and I"m wondering if it's because of some known vulnerability or
what I get the usual "sunrpc c
14 matches
Mail list logo
