|
Neohapsis is currently accepting applications for employment. For more information, please visit our website www.neohapsis.com or email hr@neohapsis.com |
Subject: Re: samba binded int. secure?
From: ksemat (ksemat
WAWA.EAHD.OR.UG)Date: Wed Sep 06 2000 - 09:43:25 CDT
- Next message: Don Head: "Re: "chrooting" users to their own web/ftp/mail site"
- Previous message: Keith Dickinson: "Re: "chrooting" users to their own web/ftp/mail site"
- In reply to: Alek Goszczycki: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Next in thread: Aj Effin ReznoR: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Next in thread: ksemat: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Reply: ksemat: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Reply: Aj Effin ReznoR: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> I noticed that even with that settings tcp port 139 is open on public
> network(eth1). Is it secure?
>
>
> Reagards,
>
> Alek
> InsideWorld SysAdmin
>
I really don't think it is secure. And even if for now it is it is better
to have two lines of defence against intruders. As well I am surprised
that you have ports below 1023 being open. Ideally all ports below 1023
should be closed then you open up the ones that you need like say 25 smtp
110 pop3 etc. Depending on what services you offer.
Noah
ksemat
eahd.or.ug
- Next message: Don Head: "Re: "chrooting" users to their own web/ftp/mail site"
- Previous message: Keith Dickinson: "Re: "chrooting" users to their own web/ftp/mail site"
- In reply to: Alek Goszczycki: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Next in thread: Aj Effin ReznoR: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Next in thread: ksemat: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Reply: ksemat: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Reply: Aj Effin ReznoR: "Re: samba binded int. secure?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]