Re: [PLUG] Ports needed to use Samba or MS networking functions

[Jesse Huestis <jhuestis@comcast.net>]

Thanks all.  Port 137-139 open both ways with TCP and UDP allowed me to connect
but not browse.

Is 445 the port that allows the ability to browse?  

I like the solution I have now, becuase I know the IP address I am going
to and I am only allowing the IP's I have asigned to pass through the firewall,
thus, noone wwithout first breaking the WPA encryption, then getting one
of the IP's assigned to a computer that is off at the times allowed, then
sniffing until they get the share will be able to break in.  There many easier
and more open targets.

Thanks so much, it was a huge help and made me look better to my customer.

Just an FYI, DLink tech support was useless on this and said I could not
do it.  HAAAA.  They are such @#$%@!   

Best to all, and tahnks again,

Jesse

Martin DiViaio wrote:
> Make sure you have opened BOTH tcp and udp protocols on ports 137-139.
>
> Port 445 (BOTH tcp and udp). Be aware that 445 is also how the Blaster
> worm gets in.
>
> There is also port 1512 (Again, both tcp and udp). This is the WINS port. 
> You probably don't need it since WINS is not a required protocol.
>
>
> On the 4th day of December in the year 2003 you wrote:
>
> > Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 07:28:25 -0500
> > From: Jesse Huestis <jhuestis@comcast.net>
> > To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
> > X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,
> >     RCVD_IN_SORBS autolearn=no 
> > 	version=2.60
> > Subject: Re: [PLUG] Ports needed to use Samba or MS networking functions
> >
> > Thanks for the log monitoring idea.   That  will  give me some data.  I 
> > ma using WPA for exernal security.  I have also made it so only the IP 
> > range I have assigned can access the Internet and all others get know 
> > access.  It should frustrate a hacker and have them try elsewhere since 
> > there are open WI-FI LAN around I have identified using Netstumbler.
> >
> > We have temp. shared a local printer for the wireless folks to use.
> >
> > Any other ideas as to the ports, please keep it coming.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Jesse
> >
> > Paul wrote:
> >
> > > Michael C. Toren wrote:
> > >
> > > > A third option, and the one I would strongly recommend, would be to
> > > > implement a VPN server, and require wireless users who wish to access
> > > > your internal network to first establish a VPN connection.
> > > >  
> > > >
> > > >       
> > > The use of WPA (Wi-Fi Protected Access) sounds like another good 
> > > alternative if the hardware supports it.
> > >
> > >     
> >   
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
> Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
> General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug