full-disclosure - Re: Cox is blocking port 135

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

From: madduck at madduck.net (martin f krafft)
Subject: Re: Cox is blocking port 135 - off topic

also sprach Kurt Seifried <listuser@...fried.org> [2003.08.10.2256 +0200]:
> If Cox blocks both ports 135 and 445 that will be semi-effective

... until the next worm goes haywire. It just seems so ironic that
security is reactive, thanks largely to Microsoft, when in many
cases, a proactive approach would make our lives so much easier
(albeit not prevent attacks, of course)...

No matter what Cox does (not that I care), I just don't see a single
reason anymore to deploy Windows ever again.

-- 
martin;              (greetings from the heart of the sun.)
  \____ echo mailto: !#^."<*>"|tr "<*> mailto:" net@...duck

invalid/expired pgp subkeys? use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!

i am willing to make the mistakes
if someone else is willing to learn from them.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.grok.org.uk/pipermail/full-disclosure/attachments/20030810/ec553b31/attachment.bin