On Thursday 14 June 2007 21:19, Roy Wright wrote:
I just switched to shorewall. I configured it to only allow in SSH,
but have one weirdy when I try to test using nmap -v -A -P0 in that
sometimes nmap reports only port 22 open and 113 closed as expected,
but other times it also reports ports
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Roy Wright wrote:
but other times it also reports ports 80, 554, and 1755 open, which
has me really confused and concerned.
Typical case when you scan from behind your ISP's NetApp NetCache appliance.
Same thing happens in
Argentina when using
Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
That helps some, but in net-firewall I'm finding a lot of unstable
packages, and no really good idea which ones will be the best for a
personal firewall, let alone which ones are best supported upstream so
this doesn't happen to me again. So I'm interested in
Mick wrote:
packages, and no really good idea which ones will be the best for a
personal firewall, let alone which ones are best supported upstream so
this doesn't happen to me again. So I'm interested in
recommendations. What did you switch to?
I switched to shorewall and have
On Wednesday 06 June 2007, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
I had firestarter-1.0.3 emerged for quite some time. I hadn't really
used it, but I'm a bit surprised now to find that it's interfering
with normal emerges because it's got a big red M smacked on it.
I suppose that means there's a problem with
On 6/5/07, Dale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
I had firestarter-1.0.3 emerged for quite some time. I hadn't really
used it, but I'm a bit surprised now to find that it's interfering
with normal emerges because it's got a big red M smacked on it.
I suppose that means
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
That helps some, but in net-firewall I'm finding a lot of unstable
packages, and no really good idea which ones will be the best for a
personal firewall, let alone which ones are best supported upstream so
this doesn't happen to me again. So I'm
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
On 6/5/07, Dale [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
snip
That helps some, but in net-firewall I'm finding a lot of unstable
packages, and no really good idea which ones will be the best for a
personal firewall,
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 06:35:18AM -0700, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
That helps some, but in net-firewall I'm finding a lot of unstable
packages, and no really good idea which ones will be the best for a
personal firewall, let alone which ones are best supported upstream so
this doesn't
Jorge Almeida wrote on 06/06/07 15:59:
That helps some, but in net-firewall I'm finding a lot of unstable
packages, and no really good idea which ones will be the best for a
personal firewall, let alone which ones are best supported upstream so
this doesn't happen to me again. So I'm
On Wednesday 06 June 2007 15:10, John J. Foster wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 06:35:18AM -0700, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
That helps some, but in net-firewall I'm finding a lot of unstable
packages, and no really good idea which ones will be the best for a
personal firewall, let alone which
I had firestarter-1.0.3 emerged for quite some time. I hadn't really
used it, but I'm a bit surprised now to find that it's interfering
with normal emerges because it's got a big red M smacked on it.
I suppose that means there's a problem with it, and it's explained in
some forum or list that I
Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
I had firestarter-1.0.3 emerged for quite some time. I hadn't really
used it, but I'm a bit surprised now to find that it's interfering
with normal emerges because it's got a big red M smacked on it.
I suppose that means there's a problem with it, and it's explained in
13 matches
Mail list logo
