also sprach Brian Stults (on Wed, 11 Jul 2001 03:50:18PM -0400): > The only servers I run are an ssh server and an ftp server. I do > not allow anonymous ftp, and I tunnel all my ftp transfers through > ssh. um, why??? why not use scp or sftp? the thing is: anonymous ftp is "moderately" safe, regular ftp is not, since user name and password are transmitted. but you know this and thus you tunnel - which means that your ftp server should *only* bind to 127.0.0.1:21 and to *no other* port - i.e. it should not even listen to anything but localhost. > Here is one concern of theirs, though, that I don't understand. They > said one problem with linux is that it will trick their network into > thinking that my linux box is the main server, thus bringing down a > system of over 2000 users. yes, this is the pathetic thing about micro$oft, and it's quite fun to do so on a network, if you are feeling destructive. anyway, this only has to do with samba, and can be disabled by decreasing the samba server's domain server election priority. but you knew this too (which i found reading on in your email) tell them that you'll be financially responsible for any damages caused by your system's presence, and that for any hack attack that doesn't use your system, they shall pay $10,000 to the Debian project and throw one windoze machine out of the window. then give me their IP block. hehe. there *has* to be a reason why there is 1 Debian security advisory per every 7 micro$oft security advisories on BugTraq :) martin; (greetings from the heart of the sun.) \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:"; net@madduck -- the web site you seek cannot be located but endless others exist.
Attachment:
pgp9ZRYurA93X.pgp
Description: PGP signature