windows windows..
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Plusnet Community
- :
- Forum
- :
- Other forums
- :
- Tech Help - Software/Hardware etc
- :
- Re: windows windows..
windows windows..
24-07-2013 9:44 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Re: windows windows..
24-07-2013 9:48 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Re: windows windows..
24-07-2013 10:07 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Re: windows windows..
24-07-2013 10:17 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
However my router says:
Quote jeremy@HECTOR:~$ sudo nmap -sS 192.168.1.1
Starting Nmap 5.21 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2013-07-24 22:12 BST
Nmap scan report for ROUTER (192.168.1.1)
Host is up (0.0036s latency).
Not shown: 996 closed ports
PORT STATE SERVICE
23/tcp open telnet
53/tcp open domain
80/tcp open http
5000/tcp open upnp
MAC Address: A0:21:B7:87:56:18 (Unknown)
Nmap done: 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 0.38 seconds
So although I have extra ports open locally (SAMBA, nfs etc) I feel relatively safe.
"In The Beginning Was The Word, And The Word Was Aardvark."
Re: windows windows..
24-07-2013 10:36 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
anybody like to enlighten me on which hammer i need to select ?
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 1:31 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
It claims to act as a kind of limited VPN, but says that its very hard to share files over the internet (securely).
I think it may be Windows based.
It is easy to share files if you can use ssh, especially with nfs.
"In The Beginning Was The Word, And The Word Was Aardvark."
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 11:49 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Warning Jul 25 11:29:58 IDS scan parser : tcp port scan: 173.194.113.72 scanned at least 10 ports at XXX (1 of 1) : 173.194.113.72 XXX 0040 TCP 443->59762 [...R..] seq 2547249433 win 0
Error Jul 25 11:28:30 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 86.143.228.43 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Error Jul 25 11:27:13 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 86.163.1.225 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Error Jul 25 11:23:28 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 176.250.206.162 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Warning Jul 25 11:22:27 SNTP Unable to contact server: 212.159.6.10 FIREWALL HIGH!
Info Jul 25 11:21:51 LOGIN User admin logged in on [HTTP] (from 192.168.0.20)
Error Jul 25 11:16:58 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 86.163.1.225 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Error Jul 25 11:13:28 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 176.250.206.162 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Info Jul 25 11:06:47 LOGIN User admin logged in on [HTTP] (from 192.168.1.40)
Error Jul 25 11:06:43 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 86.163.1.225 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Error Jul 25 11:03:23 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 176.250.206.162 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Error Jul 25 10:56:28 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 86.163.1.225 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Error Jul 25 10:53:48 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 176.250.206.162 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Info Jul 25 10:53:14 CONFIGURATION mbus igd sync successfull
Info Jul 25 10:53:11 CONFIGURATION mbus atomic sync successful
Info Jul 25 10:52:05 FIREWALL event (1 of 2): modified rules
Info Jul 25 10:50:06 CONFIGURATION mbus igd sync successfull
Info Jul 25 10:50:03 CONFIGURATION mbus atomic sync successful
Info Jul 25 10:48:57 FIREWALL event (1 of 2): modified rules
Info Jul 25 10:47:26 CONFIGURATION mbus igd sync successfull
Info Jul 25 10:47:23 CONFIGURATION mbus atomic sync successful
Info Jul 25 10:46:17 FIREWALL event (1 of 1): modified rules
Error Jul 25 10:46:13 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 86.163.1.225 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Info Jul 25 10:45:39 CONFIGURATION mbus igd sync successfull
Info Jul 25 10:45:36 CONFIGURATION mbus atomic sync successful
Info Jul 25 10:44:30 FIREWALL event (1 of 1): created rules
Error Jul 25 10:43:33 FIREWALL replay check (1 of 2): Protocol: ICMP Src ip: 176.250.206.162 Dst ip: XXX Type: Destination Unreachable Code: Host Unreacheable
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 12:29 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
What was labelled as a port scan from the google IP is obviously a large number of connection reset packets coming from a HTTPS server.
If port 80 is open, just open a web browser, go to the IP, and see what you get.
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 12:47 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
"In The Beginning Was The Word, And The Word Was Aardvark."
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 1:32 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
why do these errors only happen from 1 computer on my network, which is the best way to see what is causing the errors from a lan perspective, ie what program would i need. how do i see what out going ports/protocols are being used from 1 specific computer on my lan from the router? why only one group of ip's all the time ? Yes i do get quite a few scans from google thats not my issue.
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 1:55 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Quote from: vilefoxdemonofdoom Or try port 443 for https.
I closed it for testing, and it still is.
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 3:58 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
You should block incoming traffic on 443, but allow outgoing traffic on 443 - unless you are running a web server!
If you totally block it, then you can only make unencrypted web connections.
Which is probably silly.
"In The Beginning Was The Word, And The Word Was Aardvark."
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 5:32 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
Re: windows windows..
25-07-2013 6:47 PM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Highlight
- Report to Moderator
There's probably some telnet command for technicolor routers to show all current TCP/IP connections but I don't know what it is.
With the plusnet firewall set to high, you won't be receiving incoming connections to port 80, 443, nor any other ports anyway.
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Plusnet Community
- :
- Forum
- :
- Other forums
- :
- Tech Help - Software/Hardware etc
- :
- Re: windows windows..