On 7/16/05, Eben King <eben1@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2005, Chuck Hast wrote:
>
> > On 7/15/05, Daniel Jarboe <daniel.jarboe@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > socket(PF_PACKET, SOCK_PACKET, 512) = -1 EPERM (Operation not
> > > permitted)
> > >
> > > Bummer, looks like this program attempts to bind to port 512, which is
> > > below 1024, which means it'll have to run as root unless this port is
> > > configurable or you've lowered the 1024 limit in your kernel (or know how to
> > > work some capability magic).
> > >
> > > Is this port that program listens on configurable?
> >
> > Not that I know of unless I re-compile the whole thing and then I will probably
> > have problems with other bits and pieces of it.
>
> 512/tcp is listed as "exec" and 512/udp is listed as "biff" or "comsat".
> Does it implement some service compatible with one of them? If not, you
> should be able to move it without too much grief.
I was trying to figure that one out my self. I did several different attempts
to get the protocol type used for that 512 port but it did not show up on
any of them. I suspect that I have to catch it whenever it grabs data other
wise I will not see it.
-- Chuck Hast To paraphrase my flight instructor; "the only dumb question is the one you DID NOT ask resulting in my going out and having to identify your bits and pieces in the midst of torn and twisted metal."----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 17:52:06 EDT