Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-15 Thread Richard Donkin
Matthew Micene wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, you wrote: > > > the XFS port listed in the pmfirewall.conf file > > > > I am still trying to track down the actual UDP port it listens on but as > far as I can tell, netstat -nlp shows port 1029 open but doesn't list > which process has it open.

Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-12 Thread Ron Johnson, Jr.
Matthew Micene wrote: [snip] > chain policies. I did not mean to imply in my first post that the ports > listening in the netstat output were listening THROUGH the firewall, but > showed the need for a firewall to be put in place :) If I'd have been a bit more clueful, I'd have realized that...

Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-12 Thread Matthew Micene
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, you wrote: > the XFS port listed in the pmfirewall.conf file > I am still trying to track down the actual UDP port it listens on but as far as I can tell, netstat -nlp shows port 1029 open but doesn't list which process has it open. lsof doesn't show xfs using UDP, but both

Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-11 Thread Greg Stewart
pmfirewall, as long as you chose not to open the ports during the install, blocks external traffic to ports 5999:6003--XServer. Actually, I don't see the XFS port listed in the pmfirewall.conf file, but neither is it listed in my open/listening ports. NFS, on 2049 is blocked by pmfirewall because

RE: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-11 Thread Zaleski, Matthew (M.E.)
> -Original Message- > From: Ken Wahl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, September 11, 2000 4:48 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Ron Johnson, Jr. wrote: > > > Matthew Mice

Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-11 Thread Ron Johnson, Jr.
Matthew Micene wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, you wrote: > > Since the foreign address is 0.0.0.0, does that mean that these > > ports are accessable by the world? Port 515 is the print > > spooler, so it sounds bad that that should be world accessable. > > You'd better believe it. And if you

Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-11 Thread Ron Johnson, Jr.
Matthew Micene wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, you wrote: > > Since the foreign address is 0.0.0.0, does that mean that these > > ports are accessable by the world? Port 515 is the print > > spooler, so it sounds bad that that should be world accessable. > > You'd better believe it. And if you

Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-11 Thread Matthew Micene
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, you wrote: > Since the foreign address is 0.0.0.0, does that mean that these > ports are accessable by the world? Port 515 is the print > spooler, so it sounds bad that that should be world accessable. You'd better believe it. And if you want it to get worse, open an X Wind

Re: [expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-11 Thread Ron Johnson, Jr.
> Tony Smith wrote: > > > > How can i check which ports on my computer are open > > > i will be sitting on my server ? > > > > I use "netstat -an --inet | grep LISTEN" to show me which ports are > > accessible. Remove the grep to see active connections too. Also, check out > > lsof which will all

[expert] thanks for the check port cmdln

2000-09-11 Thread Dr Michael Powell, Ph.D.
Tony Smith wrote: > > How can i check which ports on my computer are open > > i will be sitting on my server ? > > I use "netstat -an --inet | grep LISTEN" to show me which ports are > accessible. Remove the grep to see active connections too. Also, check out > lsof which will allow you to tell w