Or maybe someone trying to netsend you some spam about cheap diplomas :)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Brian Johnson schrieb:
My samba.smbd log shows multiple entries such as:[2002/10/30 10:30:04, 0] lib/access.c:check_access(323) Denied connection from (211.163.100.141)
this
--dport 901 -j ACCEPT # for swat
I hope this helps.
--Kaleb
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:samba-admin;lists.samba.org]
On Behalf Of Brian Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 8:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Samba] Blocking internet access to Samba
My
My samba.smbd log shows multiple entries such as:
[2002/10/30 10:30:04, 0] lib/access.c:check_access(323)
Denied connection from (211.163.100.141)
They show up about every five minutes and are from a few different IP addresses
I thought that my iptables configuration would block connection
Kaleb Pederson wrote:
Yes, that's definitely coming from a different subnet.
iptables handles it just fine if configured well. I use something like:
-A INPUT # if coming from local subnet # -j localnet
-A INPUT # if coming from external source # -j badnet
-A badnet -p tcp -m tcp
On Wednesday 30 October 2002 12:53 pm, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Kaleb Pederson wrote:
snip
And tcp 445, the new port that Win2k (and hence Samba 3.0) now uses.
(Netbiosless SMB/CIFS)
Andrew Bartlett
Doesn't it drop back to 139 (or one of the other ports) if it can't make a
connection on
Kaleb Pederson wrote:
On Wednesday 30 October 2002 12:53 pm, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Kaleb Pederson wrote:
snip
And tcp 445, the new port that Win2k (and hence Samba 3.0) now uses.
(Netbiosless SMB/CIFS)
Andrew Bartlett
Doesn't it drop back to 139 (or one of the other ports) if
Why do they use the same port as https?
Kaleb Pederson wrote:
On Wednesday 30 October 2002 12:53 pm, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
Kaleb Pederson wrote:
snip
And tcp 445, the new port that Win2k (and hence Samba 3.0) now uses.
(Netbiosless SMB/CIFS)
Andrew Bartlett
Doesn't it drop
Nick wrote:
Why do they use the same port as https?
No, that's 443. And don't try to run a non-smb server on 445: It
really breaks MS clients badly...
Andrew Bartlett
--
Andrew Bartlett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manager, Authentication Subsystems, Samba Team
On 08:13 AM 10/31/2002 +1100, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
No, that's 443. And don't try to run a non-smb server on 445: It
really breaks MS clients badly...
Yeah--having done that recently, myself, I can certainly attest to the
screams of horror as Apache started... My contract!!! OMG--I was
