[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Uwe Klann) writes:
> in the message Running processes fom Sat Feb 14 08:26:45 PST2004
> it is writen in the artical that IPFILTER sample rule is available.
> I am interested to get a copy. Thank you.
You mean like /usr/share/examples
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Uwe Klann) wrote:
> Hi JJB,
> in the message Running processes fom Sat Feb 14 08:26:45 PST2004
> it is writen in the artical that IPFILTER sample rule is available.
> I am interested to get a copy. Thank you.
I think you've got the wrong address. This is the
Hi JJB,
in the message Running processes fom Sat Feb 14 08:26:45 PST2004
it is writen in the artical that IPFILTER sample rule is available.
I am interested to get a copy. Thank you.
Kind regards,
Uwe
Uwe Klann
Isensteinstr.3
80634 Munich/Germany
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 01:15:07PM -0600, Eric F Crist wrote:
> Hey, thanks! I changed all the rules so they read:
>
> allow ip from any to me
>
> and added the rule:
>
> allow ip from me to any at rule 50
>
> All seems to work now! Does anyone have any suggestions on how to make this
> sy
On Saturday 14 February 2004 12:58 pm, Erik Trulsson wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 12:47:01PM -0600, Eric F Crist wrote:
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I've got the following ruleset, but I can't ssh into my server anymore.
> > What did I miss?
>
> You missed allowing IP packets going from your server
On Sat, Feb 14, 2004 at 12:47:01PM -0600, Eric F Crist wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I've got the following ruleset, but I can't ssh into my server anymore. What
> did I miss?
You missed allowing IP packets going from your server to the outside.
You only allow packets from the outside to you.
I also
Hello all,
I've got the following ruleset, but I can't ssh into my server anymore. What
did I miss?
grog# ipfw show
00100 0 0 allow ip from any to any via lo0
00200 0 0 deny ip from any to 127.0.0.0/8
00300 0 0 deny ip from 127.0.0.0/8 to any
00400 7 1562 allow ip from 1.2.
On Saturday 14 February 2004 11:51 am, Kevin D. Kinsey, DaleCo, S.P. wrote:
> Sample FTP/SMTP/DNS/HTTP entry:
>
> add allow tcp from any to {$me} in via ${oif} 22 setup
> add allow tcp from any to {$me} in via ${oif} 25 setup
> add allow tcp from any to {$me} in via ${oif} 53 setup
>
Eric F Crist wrote:
On Saturday 14 February 2004 10:26 am, JJB wrote:
This port map is only showing you what ports are open to accept
start requests from the public internet. Looks like you are using
IPFW with stateless rules which just provides an very basic level
of security. Use stateful ru
On Saturday 14 February 2004 10:45 am, Eric F Crist wrote:
Forgot to mention in regards to my basic network structure. As I've got 5
usable IP addresses, I've got a linksys wifi/router that does my basic
network needs. i.e. my laptop is connected via wifi and they all share a
private network
On Saturday 14 February 2004 10:26 am, JJB wrote:
> This port map is only showing you what ports are open to accept
> start requests from the public internet. Looks like you are using
> IPFW with stateless rules which just provides an very basic level
> of security. Use stateful rules with 'out' a
and as such
provides an much highter level of security than IPFW can provide in
an Nated environment. I have IPFILTER sample rule set if you are
interested.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Eric F
Crist
Sent: Saturday, February 14, 2004 7:43 A
At 2004-02-14T12:42:55Z, Eric F Crist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I mainly need to get rid of 783, 587. What are those anyways?
587 is half of the new Sendmail install - the submission function runs as a
seperate process listening on its own !25 port.
> Also, what's the name of that app that
Hello list,
Which of the processes can I safely block from the internet via ipfw? Here's
an nmap output from one of my servers. I would really like to tame this
down:
Starting nmap 3.50 ( http://www.insecure.org/nmap/ ) at 2004-02-14 06:41 CST
Interesting ports on localhost (127.0.0.1):
(The
* Xpression:
> Hi list, I've recently installed some services (WWW, Proxy, FTP) on a
> FreeBSD-4.8 server, I read all documentation about running processes
> as no root, ok I agree about it, but every process still running with
> some user and group but each one have one
Hi list, I've recently installed some services (WWW, Proxy,
FTP) on a FreeBSD-4.8 server, I read all documentation about
running processes as no root, ok I agree about it, but every
process still running with some user and group but each one
have one process running like root, this is ok,
16 matches
Mail list logo
