Re: Tightening security

1999-08-28 Thread meridian
The best solution would be using ip filters such as ipchains to block the
port from outside users, so no conections at all can be made to the
xserver port. You might also check Xaccess and ensure only ip addresses
that need access to port 6000 have it, which is often only the local
machine

 
meridian
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]

all that busts well ends loosely.

On Thu, 26 Aug 1999, Andrei Ivanov wrote:

 Hi all. I got a question about security.
 I'm currently running libc2.0.7u, with 2.2.11 kernel, and apache.
 To protect from possible attacks I minimized the number of ports open and
 put up a portsentry. However, when I nmap myself, I see a port 6000
 listening for connections. I believe that is X.
  Is there any security risk in that, and how would I be abel to protect
 it, because portsentry does not bind to it so it can be protected.
 TIA,
   Andrew
 
 ---
  Andrei S. Ivanov  
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  UIN 12402354  
  http://scorpio.myip.org--All the pages bundled together.
 ---
 
 
 -- 
 Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]  /dev/null
 


Tightening security

1999-08-26 Thread Andrei Ivanov
Hi all. I got a question about security.
I'm currently running libc2.0.7u, with 2.2.11 kernel, and apache.
To protect from possible attacks I minimized the number of ports open and
put up a portsentry. However, when I nmap myself, I see a port 6000
listening for connections. I believe that is X.
 Is there any security risk in that, and how would I be abel to protect
it, because portsentry does not bind to it so it can be protected.
TIA,
  Andrew

---
 Andrei S. Ivanov  
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 UIN 12402354  
 http://scorpio.myip.org--All the pages bundled together.
---