Dear All ,
I have configured my linux box as a firewall using
ipchains.We also have an Microsoft exchange server
5.5configured ,accessing the firewall for mailing
.
Now when i try to subscribe to a news group using
outlook express it gives me the following error .
Account:
Hello,
I need to know if it is possible to have port redirection in either Pix,
Checkpoint or Raptor, ie: Destination IP= A.A.A.A, port , redirected to
A.A.A.A, port , where both IP's are behind the firewall?
Any responces to this question would be appreciated..
-Igor
Hi,
I am sorta new to the firewall-1 ,
what i need to do is check that the firewall that we have in place are secure.
so that no one can break into them.
Does anyone have any tools, or doc's that i can use, to learn
how to break into my system, to see if it is stable.
Thanks
benC
-
[To
Just like this I would say make sure that you are using the IBM SecureWay
Firewall (4.1) in your comparison. Also It seems that the IBM technical
people have more experience with the AIX version of their firewalls. I am
not an expert yet with their firewall but with all the troubleshooting (NT
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, suchi wrote:
Dear All ,
(Please turn *off* HTML for e-mail, a lot of us still use "normal" mail
software and your posts are unreadable.)
I have configured my linux box as a firewall using ipchains.We also have an
Microsoft exchange server 5.5configured ,accessing
Hello.
I would like to setup internal firewalls to partition my network. However,
certain users are going to have to access NT servers that are in other
segments. I realize that I can open the appropriate tcp/ip ports on the
firewall to allow NT logins through, but that defeats the idea.
hi
hello
As in unix we can restrict no. of sessions allowed with a user
account...
Might be a silly question: How do you restrict no. of sessions allowed with a
user account in unix/linux ? Is there a config file or is it done by a command ?
...but in NT many sessions can be
Anyone out there have any comments, information, references or experience they
would like to share about the 2 firewall implementations above?
I'm looking into which is the most robust and why. Any tech specs would be
greatly appreciated.
-Rolando
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL
Try a port scanning tool from an outside address, I.E. home...
You can try to find a copy of Network General, or Satan...
Or there are several pretty goot general port scanners as freeware available
out there that will just check to see if a port is open or not... Satan will
actually see if
Personally, I don't know what security term I would use
on Back Orifice.
It's a backdoor.
Matt
-
[To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe firewalls" in the body of the message.]
Every time I've had a problem with Netscape's 128-bit validator, it's been because the
reverse DNS for the node I was using was invalid in some way. Either it wasn't there,
or it mismatched.
Netscape does a reverse DNS lookup on the IP address and compares that info to what is
provided by
I'm looking for utility to create packets with my demands (bits on/off,
udp/tcp, inclu. data).
I tried spak and stievens but they couldn't compile on RH linux 6.
spak uses the OLD... style headers from libc5 (RedHat 4.x, etc.).
To port it on RH 5.x, or any other glibc2.x system, the packet
Howdy folks,
I'm in the sad place of being in charge of an sco 5.0.5 box, and it';s
been years since I last had my hands dirty in such an environment. is
there a mailing list for admins and or users to gleen info from one
another on this beast?
Thanks,
Ron DuFresne
Are they doing NAT? We ran into the same problem (Different FireWall
package tho) Our NAT address didn't have a reverse lookup associated with
it... Which is required for any site providing 128bit software... chances
are your customer won't be able to download 128 bit from Microsoft
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Matthew G. Harrigan wrote:
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 10:36:06 -0800
From: "Matthew G. Harrigan" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "william.wells" [EMAIL PROTECTED],
"'Mullen, Patrick'" [EMAIL PROTECTED],
"'Michael H. Warfield'" [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Elaine -HFB- Ashton [EMAIL
Comments are below...
On Fri, 29 Oct 1999, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 13:12:09 -0400
From: "Michael H. Warfield" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Mullen, Patrick" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: "'Michael H. Warfield'" [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Elaine -HFB- Ashton [EMAIL PROTECTED],
We are merging 6 servers into 1 MUCH more powerfull server, all of which ran
the same daemon on the same port. This daemon is not multi-threaded, but is
select() blocking I/O, and when we are going to merge the machines, this
daemon won't be able to handle all the requests. Since we are
Hello,
I have setup a Check point firewall on Solaris 2.6 and this is how I am
doing NAT for my web server.
i.e. 1.2.3.4 is in bound ip and 10.2.3.3 is out of bound ip.
I created arp entry and static route for 1.2.3.4 on the fw.
Also, I created a rule for NAT on the fw.
By doing all of the above
By doing all of the above when users from Internet go to
http://www.companyname.com the rule is working fine and the users are going to the
appropriate web server (My dns for the web is pointing to the in band ip address
1.2.3.4.)
But when users from inside the fw (who are on the segment
19 matches
Mail list logo
