On Sat, 22 Apr 2006, steve szmidt wrote:
> On Saturday 22 April 2006 15:41, Eben King wrote:
>> On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, Eben King wrote:
>>> Isn't there any way to add a port by number (not service name) to
>>> hosts.deny? How about if I define tcp/81 as my_http in /etc/services?
>>
>> Found a way to block him. RingTFM, I found this gem:
>>
>> HOSTS_ACCESS(5)
>> ...
>> In the following text, daemon is the process name of a network daemon
>> process, ...
>>
>> which is the basic idea of hosts.{allow,deny}. No apparent relation to
>> /etc/services . Process names _generally_ are the same as service names
>> (modulo in.* and *d), but they don't have to be. So I just added "thttpd :
>> 208.181.115.2" to /etc/hosts.deny, and haven't heard from him since about
>> 2:30 pm on 13 April.
>
> I still prefer using the firewall as it's a cleaner cut. It's the first line
> of defense. hosts is a second line which it does not hurt to do too.
I don't have a firewall. I tried using the router, but it doesn't have such
a (useful) thing. NAT keeps most things out, but I explicitely let http
in. :-( I figure running as few things as I can get away with lets me get
acceptable performance from a computer after it's deemed "too slow" by most
people.
-- -eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactarQ: What kind of modem did Jimi Hendrix use? ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 - 17:41:15 EDT