Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1998 07:52:28 +1200 (NZST) From: Andrew McNaughton <andrew@squiz.co.nz> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: Marius Bendiksen <Marius.Bendiksen@scancall.no>, freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: UDP port 31337 Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980813074720.174A-100000@aniwa.sky> In-Reply-To: <199808121812.MAA01183@lariat.lariat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 12 Aug 1998, Brett Glass wrote: > Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1998 12:04:54 -0600 > From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> > To: Marius Bendiksen <Marius.Bendiksen@scancall.no> > Cc: freebsd-security@FreeBSD.ORG > Subject: Re: UDP port 31337 > > If no one was listening, it wouldn't be a problem. > > Only an attacker who INTENDED to invade your systems would be subject to > crashes due to the response. And would deserve it. Every so often I get a couple of packet fragments arive from from some location or other to an apparently randomn port. Could be I'm wrong, and there could be more pattern to it than I've noted, but so far I've assumed that this is a damaged packet, and wasn't necessarily supposed to go to where it did. I haven't looked at packet contents. If this is the likely explanation (feedback welcome) then it underlines the need for a reasonably robust trigger for any action that has potentially dangerous consequences. If the retaliation was an exploit of a bug in the BO client though then I could be tempted to run it. Andrew To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe security" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.980813074720.174A-100000>