On 2022-05-06 at 13:13:54 UTC-0400 (Fri, 6 May 2022 11:13:54 -0600)
Grant Taylor via mailop <gtay...@tnetconsulting.net>
is rumored to have said:
On 5/6/22 10:33 AM, Jarland Donnell via mailop wrote:
Isn't that a bit of an overreaction? If you didn't want any
undesirable traffic you'd whitelist IPs in your firewall or run it on
LAN. It's a very standard expectation that other servers will hit
yours without your consent on the public internet.
I too believe that having something connected to the Internet without
a firewall (et al.) filtering the connections is implicit agreement
for someone to connect to the port.
Nope.
If someone were to try opening my front door in the name of "research"
there is a non-zero chance that they would have a very unpleasant
experience involving a machete and were that to happen, the police would
not arrest me. (See "castle doctrine")
Scanners should expect hostile reactions. Not machete-to-the-face
hostile, but hostile. The best of them are programmatic trespassers.
If for nothing other than lack of steps to prevent them from doing so.
In my opinion, being on the Internet is very much akin to being in
public. You have exceedingly little, if any, expectation that someone
won't try to connect to any port that they can communicate with.
As a Linode user, I would also prefer it if you didn't block Linode
addresses carte blanch.
Given the non-transparency I've seen with Linode, you can expect to
encounter blockage as collateral damage. If you're domiciled by Linode
in the vicinity of "researchers" who randomly wander the net trying
random ports without clearly and openly documenting their "research" you
can expect to be treated similarly to your neighbor, if your landlord
doesn't make it very clear who is who.
--
Bill Cole
b...@scconsult.com or billc...@apache.org
(AKA @grumpybozo and many *@billmail.scconsult.com addresses)
Not Currently Available For Hire
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
