On Wednesday 14 November 2007 05:01:58 jekillen wrote:
Hello:
I have a question about Postfix and
hosts.allow:
Sendmail and exim are mentioned in the
file and I assume that Sendmail would
refer to Postfix sendmail as well as Sendmail.
But Since Postfix runs smtp.d, how would I
do Postfix
Sorry:
I sent this message by mistake before completing it.
I had also sent the same message to the postfix user
list.
Thank you in adance for into
Jeff K
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Hello:
I have a question about Postfix and
hosts.allow:
Sendmail and exim are mentioned in the
file and I assume that Sendmail would
refer to Postfix sendmail as well as Sendmail.
But Since Postfix runs smtp.d, how would I
do Postfix in hosts.allow?
I also have a question about how postfix
would
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Maxim Khitrov
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2007 6:14 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Sendmail ignores hosts.allow
however, I had a feeling that it was jail-related. But what about
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Do you know
if there is a reason they chose to do it this way? Accept the
connection, but don't allow the client to do anything with it?
If sendmail just dropped
On 5/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect sendmail is reading /etc/hosts.allow
# Start by allowing everything (this prevents the rest of the file
# from working, so remove it when you need protection).
# The rules here work on a First match wins basis.
#ALL : ALL : allow
On 5/22/07, doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2007, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect sendmail is reading /etc/hosts.allow
# Start by allowing everything (this prevents the rest of the file
# from working, so remove it when you
On May 22, 2007, at 10:46, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/22/07, doug [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2007, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect sendmail is reading /etc/hosts.allow
# Start by allowing everything (this prevents the rest
Doug Hardie wrote:
On May 22, 2007, at 10:46, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
# Deny sendmail to all clients (temporary)
sendmail : all : deny
tcp wrappers must be coded into the application. The call which
actually checks the access permissions in the hosts.allow file is
hosts_access() (see man
wrappers, it should follow the rules in hosts.allow.
Sendmail is different from other network apps in that it does not block
the connection when a deny rule is in effect, instead it send some kind
of reject code (5xx) during the SMTP conversation.
If you check /var/log/maillog you may well
in the hosts.allow file is
hosts_access() (see man hosts_access). Checking through the sendmail
I have to disagree with that. I run unmodified 8.13.8 on 6.2, and it DOES
respect hosts.allow. Just not in the way you might assume.
I can telnet to port 25, it allows connections from *anywhere
On May 22, 2007, at 1:21 PM, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Do you know if there is a reason they chose to do it this way?
Accept the
connection, but don't allow the client to do anything with it?
There is some advantage to getting enough info from attempted spam to
produce useful logging messages,
On Tue, 22 May 2007 11:37:24 -0400 Maxim Khitrov [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
On 5/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect sendmail is reading /etc/hosts.allow
Why would anyone expect that? /etc/hosts.allow is one of the control
files for the TCP wrapper program
Hello,
I'm trying to restrict access to sendmail via hosts.allow. Don't need
a firewall, since I just want to block everyone but the localhost from
sending e-mail out. Anyway, it seems that sendmail ignores these
settings even though it was compiled with TCPWRAPPERS. I added
sendmail : all
On 5/21/07, Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to restrict access to sendmail via hosts.allow. Don't need
a firewall, since I just want to block everyone but the localhost from
sending e-mail out. Anyway, it seems that sendmail ignores
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to restrict access to sendmail via hosts.allow. Don't need
a firewall, since I just want to block everyone but the localhost from
sending e-mail out. Anyway, it seems that sendmail ignores these
settings even though it was compiled with TCPWRAPPERS. I
On Mon, 21 May 2007, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/21/07, Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to restrict access to sendmail via hosts.allow. Don't need
a firewall, since I just want to block everyone but the localhost from
sending e-mail out
and done a 'make install' I do not
believe sendmail will accept from any connections except except on 127.0.0.1
(localhost). This is what you want I think. If that's it as others have said,
there is no reason to use the hosts.allow mechanism. This is independent of the
jail environment.
sockstat
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/21/07, Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to restrict access to sendmail via hosts.allow. Don't need
a firewall, since I just want to block everyone but the localhost from
sending e-mail out. Anyway, it seems
doug wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/21/07, Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to restrict access to sendmail via hosts.allow. Don't need
a firewall, since I just want to block everyone but the localhost from
sending
changed the freebsd.mc file and done a 'make install' I do
not
believe sendmail will accept from any connections except except on 127.0.0.1
(localhost). This is what you want I think. If that's it as others have said,
there is no reason to use the hosts.allow mechanism. This is independent
On 5/21/07, Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/21/07, Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to restrict access to sendmail via hosts.allow. Don't need
a firewall, since I just want to block everyone
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/21/07, Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
On 5/21/07, Mikhail Goriachev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maxim Khitrov wrote:
Hello,
I'm trying to restrict access to sendmail via hosts.allow. Don't need
a firewall, since I just want to block
This is a sample file... What to REMOVE and What to ADD or KEEP?
# cat /etc/hosts.allow
#
# hosts.allow access control file for tcp wrapped applications.
# $FreeBSD: src/etc/hosts.allow,v 1.19.8.1 2006/02/19 14:57:01 ume Exp $
#
# NOTE: The hosts.deny file is deprecated.
# Place both
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
VeeJay wrote:
snip
Uhm...
a) Why did you include the example file?
b) Didn't you understand the examples?
I think you need to sit down with a Unix book and figure out what's
going on..
- -Garrett
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG
I have been running denyhosts to stop attacks on my ssh port.
The attacks continue after protection is put in place.
Here is what I have in the tail of my /etc/hosts.allow
as per the installation instructions;
-
...snip
sshd : /etc/hosts.deniedssh : deny
sshd : ALL
, David Banning wrote:
I have been running denyhosts to stop attacks on my ssh port.
The attacks continue after protection is put in place.
Here is what I have in the tail of my /etc/hosts.allow
as per the installation instructions;
-
...snip
sshd : /etc/hosts.deniedssh : deny
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Banning wrote:
I have been running denyhosts to stop attacks on my ssh port.
The attacks continue after protection is put in place.
Here is what I have in the tail of my /etc/hosts.allow
as per the installation instructions
.
-Derek
At 11:04 PM 12/20/2006, David Banning wrote:
I have been running denyhosts to stop attacks on my ssh port.
The attacks continue after protection is put in place.
Here is what I have in the tail of my /etc/hosts.allow
as per the installation instructions
Hello all;
I am trying to deny ftp access to my web site from out side. I have two
nics on the server and access it from the inside network via one and
serve to the public on the other.
I tried to write a rule in hosts.allow to deny ftp connections to the
public ip address which has worked
On May 19, 2006, at 8:55 PM, jekillen wrote:
I am trying to deny ftp access to my web site from out side. I have
two nics on the server and access it from the inside network via
one and serve to the public on the other.
I tried to write a rule in hosts.allow to deny ftp connections
jekillen wrote:
Hello all;
I am trying to deny ftp access to my web site from out side. I have two
nics on the server and access it from the inside network via one and
serve to the public on the other.
I tried to write a rule in hosts.allow to deny ftp connections to the
public ip address
a rule in hosts.allow to deny ftp connections to the
public ip address which has worked. But a side effect is that I can
now not connect from local machines via
ssh.
Your machine is connected to the outside world and you are not running
a firewall?
If I understand correctly hosts.allow
Just out of curiosity, why can 'sshd' not be started from the
'/etc/rc.conf' file?
Sure you can. Just add a line into /etc/rc.conf like this:
sshd_enable=YES
sshd should be started automatically during next boot.
Regards,
Anthony M. Rasat
PT. Kalteng Pos Press
Palangkaraya -
At Sun, 19 Mar 2006 it looks like Jerry McAllister composed:
One doesn't start anything from the rc.conf file - at least properly.
Those things get started from /usr/local/etc/rc.d.
What goes in /etc/rc.conf are environmental variable settings that
those rc.d scripts look at to
Jerry McAllister wrote:
At Sun, 19 Mar 2006 it looks like Jerry McAllister composed:
One doesn't start anything from the rc.conf file - at least properly.
Those things get started from /usr/local/etc/rc.d.
What goes in /etc/rc.conf are environmental variable settings that
those rc.d scripts
Jerry McAllister wrote:
At Sun, 19 Mar 2006 it looks like Jerry McAllister composed:
One doesn't start anything from the rc.conf file - at least properly.
Those things get started from /usr/local/etc/rc.d.
What goes in /etc/rc.conf are environmental variable settings that
those
Daniel A. wrote:
On 3/19/06, Chris Maness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box. Is there a cron job or something that has
to re
Daniel A. wrote:
On 3/19/06, Chris Maness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box. Is there a cron job or something that has
to re
Chris Maness wrote:
Daniel A. wrote:
On 3/19/06, Chris Maness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box. Is there a cron job
On 3/19/06, Gerard Seibert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chris Maness wrote:
Daniel A. wrote:
On 3/19/06, Chris Maness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still
Gerard Seibert wrote:
Chris Maness wrote:
OK, I was able to get to work by just starting out with a blank
hosts.allow. Everything is allowed by default, so when denyhosts
adds a deny line to the file, it will deny access to that host.
Also, sshd can't be started in rc.conf, it has
'sshd' not be started from the
'/etc/rc.conf' file?
Because Chris wants to limit sshd's connections with 'hosts.allow'
thing. Correct me if I'm wrong but my understanding is that inetd will
start ssh daemon every time new connection is made and that's why it's
not recommended (as written
by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box. Is there a cron job or something
that has to re-read the hosts.allow file before it the IP will be
blocked
Chris Maness wrote:
Daniel A. wrote:
On 3/19/06, Chris Maness [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box
At Sun, 19 Mar 2006 it looks like Jerry McAllister composed:
One doesn't start anything from the rc.conf file - at least properly.
Those things get started from /usr/local/etc/rc.d.
What goes in /etc/rc.conf are environmental variable settings that
those rc.d scripts look at to determine
I'm not sure this is correct. If you read sshd(8), you'll see in the
FILES section that sshd will read /etc/hosts.allow and /etc/hosts.deny
on its own (i.e. it's compiled/linked with libwrap). Looking at
/usr/src/crypto/openssh/Makefile.in for the sshd target verifies this.
That and sshd
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box. Is there a cron job or something that has
to re-read the hosts.allow file before it the IP will be blocked
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 04:12:41PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box.
Where do you see this (i.e. logged by what
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 04:12:41PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box.
Where do you see this (i.e
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 04:12:41PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still making
attempts to get into my box.
Where do you see this (i.e
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 05:24:40PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 04:12:41PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I see that this host is still
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 05:24:40PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 04:12:41PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
My denyhost script is doing it's job by adding:
sshd: 62.149.232.105 : deny
to the hosts.allow file, but I
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 05:48:29PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
Sounds like something else is wrong with your hosts.allow then.
# Start by allowing everything (this prevents the rest of the file
# from working, so remove it when you need protection).
# The rules here work on a First match wins
working, so remove it when you need protection).
# The rules here work on a First match wins basis.
ALL : ALL : allow
You haven't set your hosts.allow policy...this is just letting
everything connect.
Cheers,
- -Wes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 05:48:29PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
Sounds like something else is wrong with your hosts.allow then.
# Start by allowing everything (this prevents the rest of the file
# from working, so remove it when you need protection
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 06:01:31PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 05:48:29PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
Sounds like something else is wrong with your hosts.allow then.
# Start by allowing everything (this prevents the rest
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 06:01:31PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, Mar 18, 2006 at 05:48:29PM -0800, Chris Maness wrote:
Sounds like something else is wrong with your hosts.allow then.
# Start
On a FreeBSD 4.10 server I'm trying to allow certain ip's ssh access to
my server. In hosts.allow I have:
sshd: 192.168. /etc/icanonips.hosts
and in the icanonips.hosts file for the range of ips from 67.62.xxx.130
to 67.62.xxx.159 I have:
sshd: 67.62.xxx.130/255.255.255.224 67.62.xxx.131
218.19.160.163#63873: update
'bigdaddy.com/IN' denied
Feb 23 17:21:05 bigdaddy named[85641]: client 218.19.160.163#64057: update
'bigdaddy.com/IN' denied
so i put:
ALL : 218.19.160.163 : deny
in my hosts.allow but i still get that log piling up
isn't the that line in hosts.allow avoiding
/IN' denied
Feb 23 17:20:38 bigdaddy named[85641]: client 218.19.160.163#63873: update
'bigdaddy.com/IN' denied
Feb 23 17:21:05 bigdaddy named[85641]: client 218.19.160.163#64057: update
'bigdaddy.com/IN' denied
so i put:
ALL : 218.19.160.163 : deny
in my hosts.allow but i still get that log
Feb 23 17:21:05 bigdaddy named[85641]: client 218.19.160.163#64057:
update 'bigdaddy.com/IN' denied
so i put:
ALL : 218.19.160.163 : deny
in my hosts.allow but i still get that log piling up
Named isn't built with tcpwrapper support; it would probably cause too
much overhead
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:20:11 -0500 (EST), kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Feb 23 17:21:05 bigdaddy named[85641]: client 218.19.160.163#64057:
no such chances. the machine is not on my local network. on the network
where this machine is there is no windows machines. and the
BIND version 9.x (not sure on the exact version) and up supports ACLs.
example named.conf
acl china {
218.19.160.163; } ;
options {
blackhole {china;};
};
thanks ... that looks like a solution...
- jeff
--
___
Is this valid in hosts.allow:
ALL : 151.103.xxx.xxx-151.103.xxx.xxx : allow
The x's are just hiding the other part of the ip address. I need to
allow a range of ip's like 192.168.0.1-192.168.64.254.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http
Is this valid in hosts.allow:
ALL : 151.103.xxx.xxx-151.103.xxx.xxx : allow
Not that I know.
i ue the configuration net-address/netmask
would be:
allow a range of ip's like 192.168.0.1-192.168.64.254.
192.168.0.0/255.255.192.0 for the range 192.168.0.0 to 192.168.63.255
192.168.64.0
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 02:37:23PM +0700, Olivier Nicole wrote:
To my knowledge, the effects in /etc/hosts.allow are immediate as soon
as you save the modified file.
And I have been using it that way for many years.
No need to killall -HUP inetd, no need to reboot.
If after a change
On Tue, Jan 11, 2005 at 02:31:47AM -0500, Bob Hall wrote:
Three questions:
How do I cause changes in the hosts.allow file to take effect without
rebooting? Everything I've seen says to restart inetd, but I'm not using
inetd.
I searched with different keywords and found the answer
Three questions:
How do I cause changes in the hosts.allow file to take effect without
rebooting? Everything I've seen says to restart inetd, but I'm not using
inetd.
How do I compile netatalk without CUPS? I don't see any obvious
switches, but there has to be something that tells Make to use
To my knowledge, the effects in /etc/hosts.allow are immediate as soon
as you save the modified file.
And I have been using it that way for many years.
No need to killall -HUP inetd, no need to reboot.
If after a change the service is still not available:
- you did not allow the right thing
Hi All,
Since implementing a hosts.allow deny on SSHD for all but my IP I am
seeing a slew of ssh attempts from overseas.
My questions are:
Is a good password and hosts.allow enough to keep out the bad guys?
Is this normal? (I assume these attempts are automated)
Thanks
Steve
, Steve Warwick wrote:
Hi All,
Since implementing a hosts.allow deny on SSHD for all but my IP I am
seeing a slew of ssh attempts from overseas.
My questions are:
Is a good password and hosts.allow enough to keep out the bad guys?
Is this normal? (I assume these attempts
typed:
I'm running 4.10-release-p2. Sendmail is ignoring hosts.allow.
Is this a known problem?
AFAIK, no. Could you post your hosts.allow? Are you using sendmail from
the base system?
Hi, sorry I was burnt out from lack of sleep and beating my head
against the wall :) I'm using
I'm running 4.10-release-p2. Sendmail is ignoring hosts.allow.
Is this a known problem?
Thanks,
Rich
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello everyone.
Im on FreeBSD 4.8R.
In my hosts.allow file, i have set my IPs to :allow and the last line
is to deny all by default.
so the server accepts only my incoming IPs.
the problem is I have a webmail running so the mails also start to be
rejected!
i cannot see any
Hello everyone,
Because of the MASS failure tries to connect to my server using random
passwords
I decided to allow only my IP to access the server.
I didnot do this before cuz i was worried this restriction will effect
any services running..
a question:
If i change hosts.allow
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Long Story wrote:
| Hello everyone,
|
|Because of the MASS failure tries to connect to my server using
| random passwords
|I decided to allow only my IP to access the server.
http://www.die.net/doc/linux/man/man5/hosts.allow.5.html
hANMNpKS021237;
Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:23:51 -0700 (MST)
===^=== cut here ===^
In my hosts.allow file (which usually rejects domains just fine) I have:
smtp : 199.185.220.0/255.255.251.0 : deny
---^^^
The above listed e-mail should have been rejected
) with ESMTP id hANMNpKS021237;
Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:23:51 -0700 (MST)
===^=== cut here ===^
In my hosts.allow file (which usually rejects domains just fine) I have:
===V=== cut here ===V
smtp : 199.185.220.0/255.255.251.0 : deny
===^=== cut here ===^
The above listed e-mail should
)
===^=== cut here ===^
In my hosts.allow file (which usually rejects domains just fine) I have:
===V=== cut here ===V
smtp : 199.185.220.0/255.255.251.0 : deny
===^=== cut here ===^
Are you sure about the netmask? I think it should be something like
255.255.255.0 or
255.255.252.0.
Simon
Hi,
I need to know what the implications are to make use of the hosts.allow file
on a FreeBSD Production Server (ISP Setup)? The reason I'm asking, is that
I've recently decommisioned a Linux SendMail Server to a FreeBSD Exim
Server, but with no Firewall (IPTABLES) yet.
Besides the fact
On Thu, 2003-08-07 at 19:24, Schalk Erasmus wrote:
Hi,
I need to know what the implications are to make use of the hosts.allow file
on a FreeBSD Production Server (ISP Setup)? The reason I'm asking, is that
I've recently decommisioned a Linux SendMail Server to a FreeBSD Exim
Server
Hi all,
Somehow I can't search the mailing list anymore, so
apology if this has been asked before.
In hosts.allow, it is written that wrapping ssh is not
a good idea. (Why, can anyone tell me the reason ?)
However, I found that to use ssh, I got to uncomment
the ssh line in the wrapper, which
Hello !
Sometimes when I change my /etc/hosts.allow and kill and start again
inetd, there is no difference. It's like I haven't edited
/etc/hosts.allow. If I continue making changes and stop/start inetd there
are no affections to the inetd daemons, they allow or deny as
/etc/hosts.allow isn't
Sometimes when I change my /etc/hosts.allow and kill and start again
inetd, there is no difference. It's like I haven't edited
/etc/hosts.allow. If I continue making changes and stop/start inetd there
are no affections to the inetd daemons, they allow or deny as
/etc/hosts.allow isn't
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 05:26:15AM +0200, Alexander wrote:
Hello !
Sometimes when I change my /etc/hosts.allow and kill and start again
inetd, there is no difference. It's like I haven't edited
/etc/hosts.allow. If I continue making changes and stop/start inetd there
are no affections
So what you say is that if I had opened identd socket for example then
updating /etc/hosts.allow and changing rules for ftpd won't take affect on
ftpd after new connection ? (assuming that noone is using my ftpd at all)
Thanks
On Mon, 2 Jun 2003, Matthew Seaman wrote:
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 10:46:25AM +0200, Alexander wrote:
So what you say is that if I had opened identd socket for example then
updating /etc/hosts.allow and changing rules for ftpd won't take affect on
ftpd after new connection ? (assuming that noone is using my ftpd at all)
Uh
Hello
I really know what tcp wrappers is. I just can't exactly get your point.
I'm telling you that I shut the ftpd totaly, I've left just one line at
/etc/hosts.allow: ALL : ALL : deny
and when I simply telnet-ed my.host.com 21 it opened a connection.
I have also auth, pop3, smtp (qmail
On Mon, Jun 02, 2003 at 01:11:55PM +0200, Alexander wrote:
I really know what tcp wrappers is. I just can't exactly get your point.
I'm telling you that I shut the ftpd totaly, I've left just one line at
/etc/hosts.allow: ALL : ALL : deny
and when I simply telnet-ed my.host.com 21 it opened
Hello all,
This seems to be a fairly simple questions, but has
been bothering me for a while now.
I want to specify whole IP classes instead of single ips
in my hosts.allow config file.
These are the methods I have tried (unsuccessfully):
sshd : 192.168.0.0
Hello all,
This seems to be a fairly simple questions, but has
been bothering me for a while now.
I want to specify whole IP classes instead of single ips
in my hosts.allow config file.
These are the methods I have tried (unsuccessfully):
sshd : 192.168.0.0
92 matches
Mail list logo
