On Tue, Nov 12, 2002 at 07:46:14PM -0800, jdow wrote:
> From: "Jack Bowling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > I, for one:
> >
> > ---
> > cat /etc/hosts.deny
> > #
> > # hosts.denyThis file describes the names of the hosts which are
> > # *not* allowed to use the local INET
From: "Jack Bowling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I, for one:
>
> ---
> cat /etc/hosts.deny
> #
> # hosts.denyThis file describes the names of the hosts which are
> # *not* allowed to use the local INET services, as decided
> # by the '/usr/sbin/tcpd' server.
>
But then, I'd not use that as a password. (Hm, use the first 30 or so digits
for pi? Only someone as crazy as me would figure to use that one.)
{^_-}
- Original Message -
From: "John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, jdow wrote:
>
> > On the other hand when you use LONG password
** Reply to message from jdow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 12 Nov 2002 10:10:52
-0800
>snip> I wonder how many people bother to
> setup the tcpwrappers level of security on their systems. It's not much
> but it can make doing anything once iptables is punctured rather on
> the difficult side topolo
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, jdow wrote:
> On the other hand when you use LONG passwords even something like
> "Heinlein%DocSmith" would be hard to crack.
Probably not for someone who knows you as a scifi fan;-)
> {^_-}
> - Original Message -
> From: "John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > On Tue, 12 No
On the other hand when you use LONG passwords even something like
"Heinlein%DocSmith" would be hard to crack.
{^_-}
- Original Message -
From: "John" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, jdow wrote:
>
> > (And note I didn't mention the internal password level security. Given
> > suf
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, jdow wrote:
> (And note I didn't mention the internal password level security. Given
> sufficient time passwords can be broken. And tcpwrappers is not much in
Start work. Create an account with this password, see how long it takes
to crack.
O8lX>w8vq
--
Psyche-list mai
From: "Robert P. J. Day" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, jdow wrote:
>
> > From: "Dale Kosan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > Just for the record, most of the lower price dsl/routers also do port
> > > forwarding so you can still use ssh, samba, apache ect...
> >
> > But can they do side
On Tue, 12 Nov 2002, jdow wrote:
> From: "Dale Kosan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Just for the record, most of the lower price dsl/routers also do port
> > forwarding so you can still use ssh, samba, apache ect...
>
> But can they do side duty as a backup store for your other machines?
> I put a m
From: "Dale Kosan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Just for the record, most of the lower price dsl/routers also do port
> forwarding so you can still use ssh, samba, apache ect...
But can they do side duty as a backup store for your other machines?
I put a modern large but only medium fast IDE drive in th
Just for the record, most of the lower price dsl/routers also do port
forwarding so you can still use ssh, samba, apache ect...
Lou Losee wrote:
just for info, these home appliances are typically runiing a version of
*nix, typially BSD
Lou
lovswr1 wrote:
I agree with Chris. I have two Lin
just for info, these home appliances are typically runiing a version of
*nix, typially BSD
Lou
lovswr1 wrote:
I agree with Chris. I have two Linksi(is that correct?) gateways, but I
chose to make my redhat 8 box the router & I just use them as switches.
You will be far better of (not to mentio
I agree with Chris. I have two Linksi(is that correct?) gateways, but I
chose to make my redhat 8 box the router & I just use them as switches.
You will be far better of (not to mention all the control that you will
gain,,e.g Samba, SSH, vnc etc) to have a running real router via *nix
than one of
On Mon, 2002-11-11 at 14:44, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> far better to get a cable/dsl router (possibly 4-port), most of which are
> configurable via a browser. any decent one already has some firewalling
> capability, they're smaller, more reliable, do NAT automatically, etc,
> etc.
My home is ou
Okay,
so what you are saying is that in order for these machines to have access
to each other, the present internal firewall on each machine would have to
compromised? So I should set up another machine as a server or use a router (not the
switch that I presently have)?
Tony
http://www.School-Li
I have the Linksys router box (gathering dust on my shelf at this
moment) and a computer running Red Hat 8 in runlevel 2 which I'm using
as a firewall/router.
And like Chris says, this has forced me to think about my own security
-- an issue I've avoided for a long time. I'm glad the box and the
On Mon, 11 Nov 2002, Ed Wilts wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 09:53:02AM -0800, jdow wrote:
> > Tony, the best approach, from my experience, is to find a spare machine,
> > say an old 75 MHz Pentium, and set it up with a pair of NICs as your
> > firewall and network gateway using NAT. That will h
hello,
We use a box running the LRP (Linux Router Project) between our LAN and
our DSL modem. The computer was one that was donated to our nonprofit
organization and the setup was done by a volunteer. The box is in an
out-of-the-way place. So far it's done just fine, even for downloading all
fi
On Mon, 2002-11-11 at 13:13, Ed Wilts wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 09:53:02AM -0800, jdow wrote:
> > Tony, the best approach, from my experience, is to find a spare machine,
> > say an old 75 MHz Pentium, and set it up with a pair of NICs as your
> > firewall and network gateway using NAT. That
On Mon, 2002-11-11 at 13:13, Ed Wilts wrote:
> > Tony, the best approach, from my experience, is to find a spare machine,
> > say an old 75 MHz Pentium, and set it up with a pair of NICs as your
> > firewall and network gateway using NAT.
>
> In my experience, that's the wrong answer. You're far
On Mon, Nov 11, 2002 at 09:53:02AM -0800, jdow wrote:
> Tony, the best approach, from my experience, is to find a spare machine,
> say an old 75 MHz Pentium, and set it up with a pair of NICs as your
> firewall and network gateway using NAT. That will hide all your other
> serious machines behind s
Tony, the best approach, from my experience, is to find a spare machine,
say an old 75 MHz Pentium, and set it up with a pair of NICs as your
firewall and network gateway using NAT. That will hide all your other
serious machines behind some level of protection. This will allow for
gadgets such as n
22 matches
Mail list logo
