Firewall Wizards mailing list archives
Re: Permissive Firewall Policy
From: "J. Oquendo" <sil () infiltrated net>
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 14:57:05 -0400
Anton Chuvakin wrote:
Any port between 1 and 65000 are known to be bad at least some of the time.Holy cow! Is this for real? Somebody still asking a question like that? It feels like a bit that would be posted to celebrate this list's 10th anniversary or something :-) But! I think for the outbound access the question borders on making [some] sense. Yes, the general "block all that are not needed based on the policy" is still there, but I almost feel that it makes sense to spell out some of the *especially* ugly ports to watch, kind of like telnet for inbound 10 years ago ... Or maybe not :-) Best,
You've officially made me feel old. 10 years... 10 years of Mr. Ranum!? (kidding MR) -- ==================================================== J. Oquendo http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x1383A743 sil . infiltrated @ net http://www.infiltrated.net The happiness of society is the end of government. John Adams _______________________________________________ firewall-wizards mailing list firewall-wizards () listserv icsalabs com https://listserv.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
Current thread:
- Permissive Firewall Policy Kevin Hinze (Sep 22)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy Marcus J. Ranum (Sep 23)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy ArkanoiD (Sep 23)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy Scott C. Kennedy (Sep 23)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy Anton Chuvakin (Sep 25)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy J. Oquendo (Sep 25)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy Kevin (Sep 23)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy Devdas Bhagat (Sep 23)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy Tim Shea (Sep 23)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy Fetch, Brandon (Sep 23)
- Re: Permissive Firewall Policy Marcus J. Ranum (Sep 23)