On 10/02/02, Lazarus Long wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 12:25:08PM +, Matthew Vernon wrote:
Lazarus Long writes:
Introduces security hole by divulging too much information to an
attacker about the underlying system.
The rationale behind this, is that there are many
Markus Kolb wrote:
Laurent Luyckx [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/02/2002 (16:30) :
In exim.conf, put hosts_accept_relay with a list of authorized IP.
ex:
hosts_accept_relay = localhost:192.168.0.0/24
^^^
why this IP?
retitle 130876 Sending server software version information should be optional
severity 130876 wishlist
quit
I'll get back to you in more detail when I have time, but in the mean
time - if you want to produce and maintain (since I'm damn sure
upstream wouldn't want to know) a patch that creates a
Previously Matthew Vernon wrote:
retitle 130876 Sending server software version information should be optional
I'm not sure I agree with that: that easily leads to the configurable
version response option that was discussed on openssh-dev recently where
it was concluded that is not a good idea.
Wichert Akkerman writes:
Previously Matthew Vernon wrote:
retitle 130876 Sending server software version information should be optional
I'm not sure I agree with that: that easily leads to the configurable
version response option that was discussed on openssh-dev recently where
it
I'd like to access to the hosts of my intranet with private ip's from the
outside.
I have the following net:
One or few weeks ago the same questions was up and the list
concluded the discussion with the result, that this best way seems to
be to ssh-portforwarding - that means, you'll use putty
Am Son, 2002-02-10 um 04.50 schrieb Magus Ba'al:
I'm not entirely positive, but I'm pretty sure you need to add the 2nd
connection under tap1, as only one connection can be on tap0 at a time
(in the server vtund.conf).
You can also search thru the vtun archives, or do a search on google
On 10/02/02, Lazarus Long wrote:
On Sat, Jan 26, 2002 at 12:25:08PM +, Matthew Vernon wrote:
Lazarus Long writes:
Introduces security hole by divulging too much information to an
attacker about the underlying system.
The rationale behind this, is that there are many
Lazarus Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As I have said in the past, this is definitely a security risk.
No, it isn't. The fact that the SSH protocol encourages implementors
to exhibit version numbers has helped us greatly while recovering from
the catastrophic buffer overflow bug.
Of course
retitle 130876 Sending server software version information should be optional
severity 130876 wishlist
quit
I'll get back to you in more detail when I have time, but in the mean
time - if you want to produce and maintain (since I'm damn sure
upstream wouldn't want to know) a patch that creates a
Previously Matthew Vernon wrote:
retitle 130876 Sending server software version information should be optional
I'm not sure I agree with that: that easily leads to the configurable
version response option that was discussed on openssh-dev recently where
it was concluded that is not a good idea.
Wichert Akkerman writes:
Previously Matthew Vernon wrote:
retitle 130876 Sending server software version information should be
optional
I'm not sure I agree with that: that easily leads to the configurable
version response option that was discussed on openssh-dev recently where
Hi!
I'd like to access to the hosts of my intranet with private ip's from the
outside.
I have the following net:
A real domain name server managed by the computer which has the real ip, so
I can set all the names and
subdomains that I need.
A firewall wich is the same host than the dns server I
* Ramon Acedo ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020210 14:43]:
I just want that when someone try to access to host1.mydomain.net from the
internet my firewall (and dns server)
forward the request to host1.local which has the private ip 192.168.1.20.
I've thought about this problem, but I don't think
I am new user debian linux,
1. i try to configure in hosts.deny :
ALL:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and try in hosts.allow :
ALL : 202.xxx.xxx.xx1, 202.xxx.xxx.xx2
But when i try from 202.xxx.xxx.xx1 and 202.xxx.xxx.xx2 the message
is Connection closed by remote host.
how to configure in close all and
15 matches
Mail list logo
