Hi,
T,,,,
why give this guy reason to perform this type of perverted access???
i know you can and have performed such types of thingz but you have advanced
knowledge of protocol and socket behavior...as can nmost of the people on
this list,,but there are enuf newbies, (even 1) who will mis configure this
and cause some already overwork S.A to clean up the mess...
to those of you who dont understand the ramifications of having daemons
listen on the 'root' ports...then dont do it....
dont do the thingz that truman does as i have said he has and EXTREMELY
advanced knowledge of what to patch and tweak if it misbehaves...
piranha....lurking as always....
>From: Truman Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: Gary Flynn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: UDP packets to port 80 and 443
>Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:55:17 -0400 (EDT)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Received: from [209.182.195.144] by hotmail.com (3.2) with ESMTP id
>MHotMailBCFB908500914004320ED1B6C390B9100; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 12:05:45 -0700
>Received: from lists.gnac.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])by lists.gnac.net
>(Postfix) with ESMTPid BFA8A107A3; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 12:05:20 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from research.suspicious.org (research.suspicious.org
>[209.236.159.254])by lists.gnac.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D4941078Ffor
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Thu, 21 Jun 2001 11:55:22 -0700 (PDT)
>Received: from localhost (truman@localhost)by research.suspicious.org
>(8.11.3/8.10.1) with ESMTP id f5LItH630572;Thu, 21 Jun 2001 14:55:17 -0400
>(EDT)
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu, 21 Jun 2001 12:07:33 -0700
>Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Message-ID:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Errors-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.5
>Precedence: bulk
>List-Help: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=help>
>List-Post: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>List-Subscribe:
><http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls>,<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=subscribe>
>List-Id: Firewalls <firewalls.lists.gnac.net>
>List-Unsubscribe:
><http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls>,<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe>
>List-Archive: <http://lists.gnac.net/pipermail/firewalls/>
>
>On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Gary Flynn wrote:
>
> > Are there valid reasons for UDP packets to be destined
> > for ports 80 or 443?
>
>if you are listening on 80/udp or 443/udp, sure its valid. if you are not,
>then it is invalid. the same would be true for tcp, regardless if it is
>common practice to bind web services on these ports. if are not running a
>web server which is binding to these ports, then the traffic is invalid.
>
>-truman
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Firewalls mailing list
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
_______________________________________________
Firewalls mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnac.net/mailman/listinfo/firewalls
