* open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp @ 2003-12-03 22:46 David F. Strauch 2003-12-03 23:01 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-03 23:08 ` Rob Sterenborg 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-03 22:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter Hello All, I've been working with giptables firewall and have run into a big issue. Although my script seems to be correct namp is finding ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp open. To start troubleshooting this problem I've commented everything out and stripped down the ruleset to just the default DROP policy. Yet nmap -sT -F -P0 -0 xx.xx.xx.xx still returns 25/tcp and 110/tcp as open! Now I'm starting to think that iptables is broken. I've built iptables with grsecurity-1.9.12 and iptables1.2.8 with a plain vanilla kernel 2.4.22 Is anyone aware of any issues? Dave ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 22:46 open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-03 23:01 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-03 23:15 ` David F. Strauch ` (2 more replies) 2003-12-03 23:08 ` Rob Sterenborg 1 sibling, 3 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Antony Stone @ 2003-12-03 23:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 10:46 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > Hello All, > > I've been working with giptables firewall and have run into a big issue. > Although my script seems to be correct namp is finding ports 25/tcp and > 110/tcp open. To start troubleshooting this problem I've commented > everything out and stripped down the ruleset to just the default DROP > policy. Yet nmap -sT -F -P0 -0 xx.xx.xx.xx still returns 25/tcp and > 110/tcp as open! > > Now I'm starting to think that iptables is broken. I've built iptables with > grsecurity-1.9.12 and iptables1.2.8 with a plain vanilla kernel 2.4.22 Is > anyone aware of any issues? Where are you testing from? Is there any chance (particularly with port 25) that the requests are being redirected to some other server, and this is what is being reported as open? Try doing "telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25" and see what login banner you get for the SMTP service - does this correspond to the machine you're testing, or any other machine you know about? Try the same thing on port 110 and see if that login banner reveals a clue either. Antony. -- The idea that Bill Gates appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the first place. - Douglas Adams in The Guardian, 25th August 1995 Please reply to the list; please don't CC me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 23:01 ` Antony Stone @ 2003-12-03 23:15 ` David F. Strauch 2003-12-03 23:23 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-03 23:34 ` David F. Strauch [not found] ` <002201c3b9f5$c7ee11a0$0201a8c0@OurPC> 2 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-03 23:15 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter Antony, I'm testing with a Win 98 machine with a direct cross-over connection to the "would be" external interface. Dave Strauch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Antony Stone" <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk> To: <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:01 PM Subject: Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 10:46 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > I've been working with giptables firewall and have run into a big issue. > > Although my script seems to be correct namp is finding ports 25/tcp and > > 110/tcp open. To start troubleshooting this problem I've commented > > everything out and stripped down the ruleset to just the default DROP > > policy. Yet nmap -sT -F -P0 -0 xx.xx.xx.xx still returns 25/tcp and > > 110/tcp as open! > > > > Now I'm starting to think that iptables is broken. I've built iptables with > > grsecurity-1.9.12 and iptables1.2.8 with a plain vanilla kernel 2.4.22 Is > > anyone aware of any issues? > > Where are you testing from? > > Is there any chance (particularly with port 25) that the requests are being > redirected to some other server, and this is what is being reported as open? > > Try doing "telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25" and see what login banner you get for the > SMTP service - does this correspond to the machine you're testing, or any > other machine you know about? > > Try the same thing on port 110 and see if that login banner reveals a clue > either. > > Antony. > > -- > The idea that Bill Gates appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all > customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that > it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the > first place. > > - Douglas Adams in The Guardian, 25th August 1995 > > Please reply to the list; > please don't CC me. > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 23:15 ` David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-03 23:23 ` Antony Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Antony Stone @ 2003-12-03 23:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 11:15 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > Antony, > > I'm testing with a Win 98 machine with a direct cross-over connection to > the "would be" external interface. Okay. What do the telnet tests tell you? Does the welcome banner suggest which machine is actually being reported as open? Antony. > > Dave Strauch > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Antony Stone" <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk> > To: <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> > Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:01 PM > Subject: Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp > > > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 10:46 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > > > I've been working with giptables firewall and have run into a big > > > issue. Although my script seems to be correct namp is finding ports > > > 25/tcp and 110/tcp open. To start troubleshooting this problem I've > > > commented everything out and stripped down the ruleset to just the > > > default DROP policy. Yet nmap -sT -F -P0 -0 xx.xx.xx.xx still returns > > > 25/tcp and 110/tcp as open! > > > > > > Now I'm starting to think that iptables is broken. I've built iptables > > with > > > > grsecurity-1.9.12 and iptables1.2.8 with a plain vanilla kernel 2.4.22 > > Is > > > > anyone aware of any issues? > > > > Where are you testing from? > > > > Is there any chance (particularly with port 25) that the requests are > > being > > > redirected to some other server, and this is what is being reported as > > open? > > > Try doing "telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25" and see what login banner you get for > > the > > > SMTP service - does this correspond to the machine you're testing, or any > > other machine you know about? > > > > Try the same thing on port 110 and see if that login banner reveals a > > clue either. > > > > Antony. > > > > -- > > The idea that Bill Gates appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead > > all > > > customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact > > that > > > it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in > > the first place. > > > > - Douglas Adams in The Guardian, 25th August 1995 > > > > Please reply to the > > list; > > > please don't > > CC > > me. -- Anything that improbable is effectively impossible. - Murray Gell-Mann, Novel Prizewinner in Physics Please reply to the list; please don't CC me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 23:01 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-03 23:15 ` David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-03 23:34 ` David F. Strauch [not found] ` <002201c3b9f5$c7ee11a0$0201a8c0@OurPC> 2 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-03 23:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter Antony, I tried telnet from my WinXP machine to both open ports without any responce. I'm hosting neither services on this machine. It will be a gateway machine with a very minimal hardened installation. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Antony Stone" <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk> To: <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:01 PM Subject: Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 10:46 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > > > Hello All, > > > > I've been working with giptables firewall and have run into a big issue. > > Although my script seems to be correct namp is finding ports 25/tcp and > > 110/tcp open. To start troubleshooting this problem I've commented > > everything out and stripped down the ruleset to just the default DROP > > policy. Yet nmap -sT -F -P0 -0 xx.xx.xx.xx still returns 25/tcp and > > 110/tcp as open! > > > > Now I'm starting to think that iptables is broken. I've built iptables with > > grsecurity-1.9.12 and iptables1.2.8 with a plain vanilla kernel 2.4.22 Is > > anyone aware of any issues? > > Where are you testing from? > > Is there any chance (particularly with port 25) that the requests are being > redirected to some other server, and this is what is being reported as open? > > Try doing "telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25" and see what login banner you get for the > SMTP service - does this correspond to the machine you're testing, or any > other machine you know about? > > Try the same thing on port 110 and see if that login banner reveals a clue > either. > > Antony. > > -- > The idea that Bill Gates appeared like a knight in shining armour to lead all > customers out of a mire of technological chaos neatly ignores the fact that > it was he who, by peddling second-rate technology, led them into it in the > first place. > > - Douglas Adams in The Guardian, 25th August 1995 > > Please reply to the list; > please don't CC me. > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <002201c3b9f5$c7ee11a0$0201a8c0@OurPC>]
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp [not found] ` <002201c3b9f5$c7ee11a0$0201a8c0@OurPC> @ 2003-12-03 23:39 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-03 23:58 ` David F. Strauch 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Antony Stone @ 2003-12-03 23:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 11:32 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > Antony, > > I tried telnet from my WinXP machine to both open ports without any > responce. I'm hosting neither services on this machine. It will be a > gateway machine with a very minimal hardened installation. Are you saying that from the same machine you did "nmap -sT -F -P0 -O xx.xx.xx.xx" and got a report including "SMTP port 25 open" and "POP3 port 110 open", and also doing "telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25" gives no response? That makes no sense, because nmap -sT means a full TCP connect - the same as the telnet command would do. Please confirm whether I am understanding correctly that you are doing both these tests from the same machine to the same address and getting different answers? Antony. -- All matter in the Universe can be placed into one of two categories: 1. Things which need to be fixed. 2. Things which need to be fixed once you've had a few minutes to play with them. Please reply to the list; please don't CC me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 23:39 ` Antony Stone @ 2003-12-03 23:58 ` David F. Strauch 2003-12-04 0:08 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-04 0:11 ` Jeffrey Laramie 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-03 23:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter Yes, Antony this is the case. I have only one WinXP machine that I am testing with. I'm testing the external interface eth0 and I have unplugged eth1 from the hub. When I nmap -sT -p 25,110 -P0 xx.xx.xx.xx I get the following output form nmap: Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap ) Interesting ports on (67.153.34.147): Port State Service 25/tcp open smtp 110/tcp open pop-3 Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 1 second ----- Original Message ----- From: "Antony Stone" <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk> To: <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:39 PM Subject: Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 11:32 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > > > Antony, > > > > I tried telnet from my WinXP machine to both open ports without any > > responce. I'm hosting neither services on this machine. It will be a > > gateway machine with a very minimal hardened installation. > > Are you saying that from the same machine you did "nmap -sT -F -P0 -O > xx.xx.xx.xx" and got a report including "SMTP port 25 open" and "POP3 port > 110 open", and also doing "telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25" gives no response? > > That makes no sense, because nmap -sT means a full TCP connect - the same as > the telnet command would do. > > Please confirm whether I am understanding correctly that you are doing both > these tests from the same machine to the same address and getting different > answers? > > Antony. > > -- > All matter in the Universe can be placed into one of two categories: > > 1. Things which need to be fixed. > 2. Things which need to be fixed once you've had a few minutes to play with > them. > > Please reply to the list; > please don't CC me. > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 23:58 ` David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-04 0:08 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-04 0:14 ` Michael Gale 2003-12-04 0:11 ` Jeffrey Laramie 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Antony Stone @ 2003-12-04 0:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 11:58 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > Yes, Antony this is the case. I have only one WinXP machine that I am > testing with. I'm testing the external interface eth0 and I have unplugged > eth1 from the hub. > > When I nmap -sT -p 25,110 -P0 xx.xx.xx.xx I get the following output form > nmap: > > Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap ) > Interesting ports on (67.153.34.147): > Port State Service > 25/tcp open smtp > 110/tcp open pop-3 > > Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 1 second Well, that just makes no sense to me. If nmap -sT reports a port open, then a telnet to that port from the same machine as the nmap test was done should present a welcome banner (for services which provide one, such as SMTP and POP3). Maybe someone else here has a clue what strangeness is going on? Antony. -- The first fifty percent of an engineering project takes ninety percent of the time, and the remaining fifty percent takes another ninety percent of the time. Please reply to the list; please don't CC me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-04 0:08 ` Antony Stone @ 2003-12-04 0:14 ` Michael Gale 2003-12-04 0:28 ` Jeffrey Laramie 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Michael Gale @ 2003-12-04 0:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter Hello, Maybe because you are running nmap from a windows box ? Have you tried a windows machine ? Michael. On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 00:08:36 +0000 Antony Stone <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk> wrote: > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 11:58 pm, David F. Strauch wrote: > > > Yes, Antony this is the case. I have only one WinXP machine that I am > > testing with. I'm testing the external interface eth0 and I have unplugged > > eth1 from the hub. > > > > When I nmap -sT -p 25,110 -P0 xx.xx.xx.xx I get the following output form > > nmap: > > > > Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap ) > > Interesting ports on (67.153.34.147): > > Port State Service > > 25/tcp open smtp > > 110/tcp open pop-3 > > > > Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 1 second > > Well, that just makes no sense to me. If nmap -sT reports a port open, then > a telnet to that port from the same machine as the nmap test was done should > present a welcome banner (for services which provide one, such as SMTP and > POP3). > > Maybe someone else here has a clue what strangeness is going on? > > Antony. > > -- > The first fifty percent of an engineering project takes ninety percent of the > time, and the remaining fifty percent takes another ninety percent of the > time. > > Please reply to the list; > please don't CC me. > > -- Michael Gale Network Administrator Utilitran Corporation ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-04 0:14 ` Michael Gale @ 2003-12-04 0:28 ` Jeffrey Laramie 2003-12-04 0:37 ` Michael Gale 2003-12-04 0:39 ` Antony Stone 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey Laramie @ 2003-12-04 0:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 19:14, Michael Gale wrote: > Hello, > > Maybe because you are running nmap from a windows box ? > > Have you tried a windows machine ? Yes, and it tasted like chicken. Seriously, that may be a good point. Make sure there isn't anything running on the sending box that might interfere with the test. I've had screwed up nmap tests when the sending box filtered certain ports. Jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-04 0:28 ` Jeffrey Laramie @ 2003-12-04 0:37 ` Michael Gale 2003-12-04 1:14 ` Jeffrey Laramie 2003-12-04 0:39 ` Antony Stone 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Michael Gale @ 2003-12-04 0:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter I meant to say have you tried a linux box ? Michael On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 19:28:32 -0500 Jeffrey Laramie <JALaramie@Loudoun-Fairfax.com> wrote: > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 19:14, Michael Gale wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Maybe because you are running nmap from a windows box ? > > > > Have you tried a windows machine ? > > Yes, and it tasted like chicken. > > > > Seriously, that may be a good point. Make sure there isn't anything running on > the sending box that might interfere with the test. I've had screwed up nmap > tests when the sending box filtered certain ports. > > Jeff > -- Michael Gale Network Administrator Utilitran Corporation ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-04 0:37 ` Michael Gale @ 2003-12-04 1:14 ` Jeffrey Laramie 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey Laramie @ 2003-12-04 1:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 19:37, Michael Gale wrote: > I meant to say have you tried a linux box ? > I know, but I couldn't resist :-) > Michael > > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003 19:28:32 -0500 > > Jeffrey Laramie <JALaramie@Loudoun-Fairfax.com> wrote: > > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 19:14, Michael Gale wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Maybe because you are running nmap from a windows box ? > > > > > > Have you tried a windows machine ? > > > > Yes, and it tasted like chicken. > > > > > > > > Seriously, that may be a good point. Make sure there isn't anything > > running on the sending box that might interfere with the test. I've had > > screwed up nmap tests when the sending box filtered certain ports. > > > > Jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-04 0:28 ` Jeffrey Laramie 2003-12-04 0:37 ` Michael Gale @ 2003-12-04 0:39 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-04 1:27 ` Jeffrey Laramie 2003-12-04 3:46 ` David F. Strauch 1 sibling, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Antony Stone @ 2003-12-04 0:39 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Thursday 04 December 2003 12:28 am, Jeffrey Laramie wrote: > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 19:14, Michael Gale wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Maybe because you are running nmap from a windows box ? > > > > Have you tried a windows machine ? > > Yes, and it tasted like chicken. > > > > Seriously, that may be a good point. Make sure there isn't anything running > on the sending box that might interfere with the test. I've had screwed up > nmap tests when the sending box filtered certain ports. This I can understand, but what puzzles me is that David is saying that from the same test machine, doing nmap -sT, and telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25, are giving different results. nmap -sT does a TCP connect, and telnet does a TCP connect, so how is it possible for one to say that the port is open, but the other not to show the welcome banner? Antony. -- In science, one tries to tell people in such a way as to be understood by everyone something that no-one ever knew before. In poetry, it is the exact opposite. - Paul Dirac Please reply to the list; please don't CC me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-04 0:39 ` Antony Stone @ 2003-12-04 1:27 ` Jeffrey Laramie 2003-12-04 3:46 ` David F. Strauch 1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey Laramie @ 2003-12-04 1:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 19:39, Antony Stone wrote: > On Thursday 04 December 2003 12:28 am, Jeffrey Laramie wrote: > > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 19:14, Michael Gale wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Maybe because you are running nmap from a windows box ? > > > > > > Have you tried a windows machine ? > > > > Yes, and it tasted like chicken. > > > > > > > > Seriously, that may be a good point. Make sure there isn't anything > > running on the sending box that might interfere with the test. I've had > > screwed up nmap tests when the sending box filtered certain ports. > > This I can understand, but what puzzles me is that David is saying that > from the same test machine, doing nmap -sT, and telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25, are > giving different results. > > nmap -sT does a TCP connect, and telnet does a TCP connect, so how is it > possible for one to say that the port is open, but the other not to show > the welcome banner? > > Antony. I don't know. _shrug_ I'd still like to find out what a packet sniffer sees during the nmap test. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-04 0:39 ` Antony Stone 2003-12-04 1:27 ` Jeffrey Laramie @ 2003-12-04 3:46 ` David F. Strauch 1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: David F. Strauch @ 2003-12-04 3:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter Antony, Well I found the answer to the problem ... It's running nmap from the windows box. I have another RHL 9.0 that I'm hardening as well. I installed nmap on the machine and used it to scan my gateway. Wouldn't you know it, all ports scanned are reported as filtered. There must either be something on the windows box interfering with the scan or there is something wrong with nmap's port to windows. I guess it's hard test when the tools are broken. Dave ----- Original Message ----- From: "Antony Stone" <Antony@Soft-Solutions.co.uk> To: <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org> Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 6:39 PM Subject: Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp > > This I can understand, but what puzzles me is that David is saying that from > the same test machine, doing nmap -sT, and telnet xx.xx.xx.xx 25, are giving > different results. > > nmap -sT does a TCP connect, and telnet does a TCP connect, so how is it > On Thursday 04 December 2003 12:28 am, Jeffrey Laramie wrote: > > > On Wednesday 03 December 2003 19:14, Michael Gale wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > Maybe because you are running nmap from a windows box ? > > > > > > Have you tried a windows machine ? > > > > Yes, and it tasted like chicken. > > > > > > > > Seriously, that may be a good point. Make sure there isn't anything running > > on the sending box that might interfere with the test. I've had screwed up > > nmap tests when the sending box filtered certain ports. > possible for one to say that the port is open, but the other not to show the > welcome banner? > > Antony. > > -- > In science, one tries to tell people > in such a way as to be understood by everyone > something that no-one ever knew before. > > In poetry, it is the exact opposite. > > - Paul Dirac > > Please reply to the list; > please don't CC me. > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 23:58 ` David F. Strauch 2003-12-04 0:08 ` Antony Stone @ 2003-12-04 0:11 ` Jeffrey Laramie 1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jeffrey Laramie @ 2003-12-04 0:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 18:58, David F. Strauch wrote: > Yes, Antony this is the case. I have only one WinXP machine that I am > testing with. I'm testing the external interface eth0 and I have unplugged > eth1 from the hub. > > When I nmap -sT -p 25,110 -P0 xx.xx.xx.xx I get the following output form > nmap: > > Starting nmap V. 3.00 ( www.insecure.org/nmap ) > Interesting ports on (67.153.34.147): > Port State Service > 25/tcp open smtp > 110/tcp open pop-3 > > Nmap run completed -- 1 IP address (1 host up) scanned in 1 second > Why don't you run a packet sniffer on this interface and run the test again. That should show what it is nmap is seeing, if anything. Jeff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* RE: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 22:46 open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp David F. Strauch 2003-12-03 23:01 ` Antony Stone @ 2003-12-03 23:08 ` Rob Sterenborg 2003-12-03 23:17 ` Antony Stone 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Rob Sterenborg @ 2003-12-03 23:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter > Although my script seems to be correct namp is finding ports 25/tcp > and 110/tcp open. To start troubleshooting this problem I've > commented everything out and stripped down the ruleset to just the > default DROP policy. Yet nmap -sT -F -P0 -0 xx.xx.xx.xx still > returns 25/tcp and 110/tcp as open! Did you check the PC from another host ? If you do that, the ports will show open even if they are closed. Check from another host and it should show closed or filtered. Gr, Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp 2003-12-03 23:08 ` Rob Sterenborg @ 2003-12-03 23:17 ` Antony Stone 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Antony Stone @ 2003-12-03 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: netfilter On Wednesday 03 December 2003 11:08 pm, Rob Sterenborg wrote: > > Although my script seems to be correct namp is finding ports 25/tcp > > and 110/tcp open. To start troubleshooting this problem I've > > commented everything out and stripped down the ruleset to just the > > default DROP policy. Yet nmap -sT -F -P0 -0 xx.xx.xx.xx still > > returns 25/tcp and 110/tcp as open! > > Did you check the PC from another host ? If you do that, the ports > will show open even if they are closed. Why? > Check from another host and it should show closed or filtered. I just tried the above command on my laptop, testing itself (which doesn't run a POP3 or SMTP service) and neither of them showed up as open. Antony. -- In Heaven, the police are British, the chefs are Italian, the beer is Belgian, the mechanics are German, the lovers are French, the entertainment is American, and everything is organised by the Swiss. In Hell, the police are German, the chefs are British, the beer is American, the mechanics are French, the lovers are Swiss, the entertainment is Belgian, and everything is organised by the Italians. Please reply to the list; please don't CC me. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-12-04 3:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-12-03 22:46 open ports 25/tcp and 110/tcp David F. Strauch
2003-12-03 23:01 ` Antony Stone
2003-12-03 23:15 ` David F. Strauch
2003-12-03 23:23 ` Antony Stone
2003-12-03 23:34 ` David F. Strauch
[not found] ` <002201c3b9f5$c7ee11a0$0201a8c0@OurPC>
2003-12-03 23:39 ` Antony Stone
2003-12-03 23:58 ` David F. Strauch
2003-12-04 0:08 ` Antony Stone
2003-12-04 0:14 ` Michael Gale
2003-12-04 0:28 ` Jeffrey Laramie
2003-12-04 0:37 ` Michael Gale
2003-12-04 1:14 ` Jeffrey Laramie
2003-12-04 0:39 ` Antony Stone
2003-12-04 1:27 ` Jeffrey Laramie
2003-12-04 3:46 ` David F. Strauch
2003-12-04 0:11 ` Jeffrey Laramie
2003-12-03 23:08 ` Rob Sterenborg
2003-12-03 23:17 ` Antony Stone
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).