full-disclosure - Should ISPs be blocking open ports for their customers?

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: se_cur_ity at hotmail.com (morning_wood)
Subject: Should ISPs be blocking open ports for  their customers?

Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Should ISPs be blocking open ports for their
customers?

>
> It's not really common practice for transit type providers to do this.
> The networks are typically engineered to forward packets and not filter
> them.  Hopefully the providers have dedicated staff to handle abuse.  In
> that case issues should be handled on a case-by-case basis.

in my local area comcast is blocking 135 and 445, further I have advised comcast
of thinknaw, just dont give it out
 of blocking inbound 6667 as i feel this would reduce many of the mechanisims
using [sd]bot type agents attacking against ircd.
since running a IRC server is in contrast to thier ToS.

DMCA observances:
quote from comcast tv commercial  "download your favorite music, and movie
trailers online"  - - note the use of the phrase "trailers" to note the
destinction between them ( legal ) and full movies ( illegal ), but nothing
about said music ( of which you can get "trailers" of commercial releases (
legal )) as opposed to commercial releases ( illegal ).

Donnie Werner
http://e2-labs.com