Stephen Gran wrote: >This one time, at band camp, Hal said: > >>I run a potato server on an ethernet behind a firewall connected by dsl to the >internet. The only service exposed is ftp, In the middle of last night ippl >reported an ftp connection attempt from 192.168.1,1 The network behind my firewall >uses 192.168.75.xx addressses for one Redhat and a couple of Windows machines as well >as the debian ftp server. Any idea where the 192.168.1.1 attempt is coming from? Is >it likely to have been spoofed over the internet as part of an attack? >> >>-- >>---> Hal <----> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <--- >>-- >> >> >>-- >>To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >It may have been, or it may have been somebody else on a LAN, with IP >addressing schema 192.168.1.x, who forgot to use passive-ftp. I guess >you'd have to look around and see what they tried to do. >HTH, >Steve > I thought class C networks were non-routable.
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
