Close Port 113 - Observation

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 19:53:23 GMT, "------>That Way!" <traxless@msn.com>
wrote:


>And I don't know enough to know whose guidance to follow.

The journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step.

No one here is omniscient.


>All in all,
>a very frustrating situation for me and many other "ordinary, everyday
>users."

Its simple, leave the ident port alone.

Your router responds the way it does because that's what it *should* do.



greg

--
Konnt ihr mich horen?
Konnt ihr mich sehen?
Konnt ihr mich fuhlen?
Ich versteh euch nicht

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

In article <c3cdg0t71c4mmublgrlos7ifq09ooqh8jt@4ax.com>, ------>That Way! wrote:
>Starting a new thread because this observation is not intended to help
>with the "stealth" testing of port 113 from just above.
>
>Nevertheless, it seems to me (an ordinary, everyday user) that to
>understand, at a user level, the business of internet security one
>must be an EXPERT on who are the EXPERTS! Frankly, I can't tell
>anymore.

On my server at the moment, I see two other responses:

Greg Hennessy <me@privacy.net> writes:

>The journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step.

And that can be trusted. It really is true.

Wolfgang Kueter <wolfgang@shconnect.de> writes:

>Read some good technical books about network communication

That is your first step. You may want to look at the local schools
of higher education. In the states, this also means the community
colleges as well as the regular 4 year schools..

>and get from these the knowledge so that you can make up your mind
>yourself in the future.

If your local library is on the ball, they also have some decent books
to look for. The classic might be "TCP/IP Illustrated Volume 1" by the
late W. Richard Stevens (Addison Wesley ISBM 0-201-63346-9, expen$ive).



>And I don't know enough to know whose guidance to follow. All in all,
>a very frustrating situation for me and many other "ordinary, everyday
>users."

Experience - it comes with the territory.

Old guy

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 19:53:23 GMT, the right honourable "------>That
Way!" <traxless@msn.com> wrote:

>Starting a new thread because this observation is not intended to help
>with the "stealth" testing of port 113 from just above.
>
>Nevertheless, it seems to me (an ordinary, everyday user) that to
>understand, at a user level, the business of internet security one
>must be an EXPERT on who are the EXPERTS! Frankly, I can't tell
>anymore.
>
>I have no recommendations.
>I have no solutions.
>
>And I don't know enough to know whose guidance to follow. All in all,
>a very frustrating situation for me and many other "ordinary, everyday
>users."

Remember: Computer technology (hard/software) is still in its infancy.
The IT world is still a FAST moving target.

Maybe, just maybe, in 50 yrs or so, will the dust have settled.

Makning software is a human activity, ruled by knowledge, taste,
politics, coffee, money.
Which makes it impossible to say what/who/where/when is
good/better/best.

They don't make bad refrigerators anymore, no really bad cars, no bad
handheld calculators.

Software is another story. making software is at the limits of human
possibilities.

Always remember that computer technology (hard/software) is still in
its infancy.
And we are the priviledged ones that see it grow up.

frgr
Erik

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

On 28 Jul 2004 07:41:40 GMT, Juergen Nieveler
<juergen.nieveler.nospam@arcor.de> wrote:

>"------>That Way!" <traxless@msn.com> wrote:
>
>> I have no recommendations.
>
>Yes you have
>
>> I have no solutions.
>
>Yes you have.
>
>The recommendation is: Leave Port 113 alone. If nothing on your machine
>is listening to it, it's closed, end of story.
>
>Everybody keeps telling you that "stealthing" it would be useless at
>best, and might do more harm than good.
>
>What's so difficult to understand about this?
>
>Juergen Nieveler

This post had little to do with Port 113 ... had to do with another
point, but you seem to not understand. Others have offered some
sound guidance nevertheless.

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

"---------> That Way!" <traxless@less.com> wrote:

> This post had little to do with Port 113 ... had to do with another
> point, but you seem to not understand. Others have offered some
> sound guidance nevertheless.

You are talking about this: <c3cdg0t71c4mmublgrlos7ifq09ooqh8jt@4ax.com>

And you complain that nobody helped you with your problem of
"stealthing port 113".

I have made the point that many people DID help you - it just wasn't
the answer you were hoping to get. Nevertheless, it was the right
answer, like it or not: Don't bother "stealthing" any ports, especially
not Port 113.

Juergen Nieveler
--
If the target should argue Bubba the love sponge it will follow that
Rome will fall.