RE: Napster Question

2000-12-21 Thread Muhammad Asif Rashid
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hal White Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 11:55 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Napster Question Blocking these IP addresses will only block users from accessing the = main napster servers

Re: Napster Question

2000-10-04 Thread Jonn Martell
D] On Tue, 3 Oct 2000, Jeff Kell wrote: Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 22:23:10 -0400 From: Jeff Kell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Pruneau [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: "Dorroh, Hunter" [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Napster Question Tom Pruneau wrote: How about just

RE: Napster Question

2000-10-03 Thread Tom Pruneau
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 3:49 PM To: Hal White; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Napster Question The list went through this several times already. Blocking ports , , , is useless.. since Beta6, Napster has been able to work on ANY

RE: Napster Question

2000-10-03 Thread Chuck Church
I think the key is to allow outbound packets to the Napster servers and other PCs on the Internet, but not allowing external PCs to establish a connection to your users' PCs. Find out the ports that a PC running Napster is listening on, and then block those at the FW. A PIX should do this by

RE: Napster Question

2000-10-03 Thread Spolidoro, Guilherme
ge- From: Dorroh, Hunter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 12:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Napster Question Hello everyone, I searched through the archives and found lots of good information on blocking but I did not see anything on the possibili

RE: Napster Question

2000-10-03 Thread Lowell Sharrah
int FW-1) so I cannot tell you the syntax, but the logic is the same for every FW. Checkpoint call it Content Security. Good luck. -Original Message- From: Dorroh, Hunter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 12:17 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Napster Question

RE: Napster Question

2000-10-03 Thread Ejay Hire
me Napster!) Wait, no... that's what I wish we could do. Really we just block the napster.com Ip's. Good luck [EMAIL PROTECTED] Original Message Follows From: "Dorroh, Hunter" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Ejay Hire' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Napster Question Date: Tue, 3 Oct

Re: Napster Question

2000-10-03 Thread Jeff Kell
Tom Pruneau wrote: How about just permitting established connections. That should do it, only allowing responses to you requests You're missing the point. Napster can work around much of this. Scour certainly can (it has "push" capability, using an established connection), and Scour fully

Re: Napster Question

2000-10-03 Thread Jeff Kell
Tom Pruneau wrote: How about just permitting established connections. That should do it, only allowing responses to you requests You're missing the point. Napster can work around much of this. Scour certainly can (it has "push" capability, using an established connection), and Scour fully

Re: Napster Question

2000-10-03 Thread whatshakin
yelling. - Original Message - From: Jeff Kell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Tom Pruneau [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Dorroh, Hunter [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 7:20 PM Subject: Re: Napster Question Tom Pruneau wrote: How about just permitting established

RE: Napster Question

2000-10-02 Thread Lowell Sharrah
e napster. From: "Fowler, Joey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: "Fowler, Joey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Napster Question Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 13:15:19 -0400 If you search the archives it has some info on this, but I just implemented it this mornin

RE: Napster Question

2000-10-02 Thread Dorroh, Hunter
? I was thinking this might limit a company's legal exposure. Thanks, Hunter -Original Message- From: Trevor Corness, CCNA [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 3:49 PM To: Hal White; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Napster Question The list went

RE: Napster Question

2000-09-29 Thread Fowler, Joey
Title: RE: Napster Question If you search the archives it has some info on this, but I just implemented it this morning and it seems to working here. If you are using PIX firewall (or any other) create an access list using the outbound and apply commands to block the following addresses

RE: Napster Question

2000-09-29 Thread Hal White
I found my documentation and of course my memory had failed me. The ports for napster are ,6699,,9009. I think blocking these will disable napster. From: "Fowler, Joey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: "Fowler, Joey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:

RE: Napster Question

2000-09-29 Thread Trevor Corness, CCNA
Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Hal White Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 11:55 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Napster Question Blocking these IP addresses will only block users from accessing the main napster servers

Re: Napster Question

2000-09-29 Thread Jeff Kell
"Trevor Corness, CCNA" wrote: The list went through this several times already. Blocking ports , , , is useless.. since Beta6, Napster has been able to work on ANY port, INCLUDING 80.. so to kill Napster, you would have to kill all access to http/tcp80.. NOT good.