On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 02:34:47PM +0300, Alan KF LAU wrote:
> Are you using dialup? It's probably a stray connection attempt from previous user's
>chatmates.
>
> Check http://www.linuxsecurity.com/resource_files/firewalls/firewall-seen.html
> and look for 13223.
thanks for the info, yes i am o
Port 13223 is the PowWow program. More info can be found here:
http://www.robertgraham.com/pubs/firewall-seen.html
Regards,
Joe
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Just searched on Google for you. http://www.robertgraham.com/pubs/firewall-seen.html
is a great site on what is hitting your firewall (what ever port number) by the looks
of it. It says the following about port 13223
Hope that helps
Justin
13223 The "PowWow" chat program from
Are you using dialup? It's probably a stray connection attempt from previous user's
chatmates.
Check http://www.linuxsecurity.com/resource_files/firewalls/firewall-seen.html
and look for 13223.
Don't worry about it..
Alan.
>
>
> --IjgjYm7ZLtdx4pCv
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-a
On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 10:11:31PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
>
> Does anyone know what port 13223 is? today i have been getting a
> massive number of connection attempts to that port from several
> different addresses.
>
> --
> Ethan Benson
> http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
Probably some
Does anyone know what port 13223 is? today i have been getting a
massive number of connection attempts to that port from several
different addresses.
--
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
PGP signature
unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
w tym najwiekszy jest ambaras,
zeby ona chciala zaraz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 8 Oct 2000, Bud Rogers wrote:
> I've always taken for granted the idea that open source was inherently more
> secure because it's open to peer review. Linus said "Given enough eyes, all
> bugs are shallow." But has anyone ever done a serious study on the subject?
> I've seen plenty
unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
w tym najwiekszy jest ambaras,
zeby ona chciala zaraz
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 8 Oct 2000, Bud Rogers wrote:
> I've always taken for granted the idea that open source was inherently more
> secure because it's open to peer review. Linus said "Given enough eyes, all
> bugs are shallow." But has anyone ever done a serious study on the subject?
> I've seen plenty
On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 08:01:57AM -0700, andy wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 07:18:23AM -0700, andy wrote:
> > > just ran tiger on a fresh debian (2.2) install, and received the following
> > > warnings:
> > >
> > > # Performing check of PATH
responses inline...
On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 07:18:23AM -0700, andy wrote:
> > just ran tiger on a fresh debian (2.2) install, and received the following
> > warnings:
> >
> > # Performing check of PATH components...
> > # Only checking user 'root'
On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 07:18:23AM -0700, andy wrote:
> just ran tiger on a fresh debian (2.2) install, and received the following
> warnings:
>
> # Performing check of PATH components...
> # Only checking user 'root'
> --WARN-- [path002w] /usr/bin/dotlockfile in root's PATH from default is
> not
just ran tiger on a fresh debian (2.2) install, and received the following
warnings:
# Performing check of PATH components...
# Only checking user 'root'
--WARN-- [path002w] /usr/bin/dotlockfile in root's PATH from default is
not owned by root (owned by dovienya).
--WARN-- [x] The following f
On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 08:01:57AM -0700, andy wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 07:18:23AM -0700, andy wrote:
> > > just ran tiger on a fresh debian (2.2) install, and received the following
> > > warnings:
> > >
> > > # Performing check of PAT
responses inline...
On Wed, 11 Oct 2000, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 07:18:23AM -0700, andy wrote:
> > just ran tiger on a fresh debian (2.2) install, and received the following
> > warnings:
> >
> > # Performing check of PATH components...
> > # Only checking user 'root'
On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 07:18:23AM -0700, andy wrote:
> just ran tiger on a fresh debian (2.2) install, and received the following
> warnings:
>
> # Performing check of PATH components...
> # Only checking user 'root'
> --WARN-- [path002w] /usr/bin/dotlockfile in root's PATH from default is
> not
just ran tiger on a fresh debian (2.2) install, and received the following
warnings:
# Performing check of PATH components...
# Only checking user 'root'
--WARN-- [path002w] /usr/bin/dotlockfile in root's PATH from default is
not owned by root (owned by dovienya).
--WARN-- [x] The following
... to the new brothers and sisters of this list,
an updated version of the tips and tricks for
running GNU/Linux:
http://www.dcs.qmw.ac.uk/~sb/PowerBook.html
Feedback welcome.
Sergio
... to the new brothers and sisters of this list,
an updated version of the tips and tricks for
running GNU/Linux:
http://www.dcs.qmw.ac.uk/~sb/PowerBook.html
Feedback welcome.
Sergio
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAI
20 matches
Mail list logo
