[Courses] [Security] The useful netstat

[Katie Bechtold]

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 05:28:40PM -0500, Raven, corporate courtesan wrote:
> 	These are less worrisome.  Strange that you have "Active IPX
> sockets" in there -- did you add Netware support to your kernel, or are
> you on a Netware network?

This is the kernel that came with RedHat 7.2, but I'm not on a
Netware network.

> 	You don't have an init script called S87rpcstat or anything like
> that?  It's been pretty clearly labeled for me most of the time.
> Portmap might also run it.

Nope, nothing with rpc in the name.  I'll assume portmap was running
it.

> Do you want to be able to recieve mail directly
> to this box, too, or will you be POP or IMAPping it from another server?

This box just POPs from another server.  Even so, I'd feel better if
I was running qmail as a mailserver and tcpserver as a superserver.
One of these days I'll see if I can work up the courage to try
converting to those.

> 	NAT will save you from some things, but not everything.  It's no
> replacement for a good firewall.  Much depends on how your router does
> the NAT.  If it's one-to-one address mapping, then you're not
> significantly safer.  If it's port forwarding, that is considerably
> safer, because outside attackers are less likely to know your box is
> there.  Your NAT device can still get portscanned, of course.

Oh, good -- my NAT router does port forwarding, and it only forwards
ports to those I've explicitly mapped.

-- 
Katie Bechtold
http://www.katie-and-rob.org/katie/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://linuxchix.org/pipermail/courses/attachments/20020307/d6e087d7/attachment.pgp