| PLEX86 | ||
|
Firewall security: Problems with simple Samba file share 3575Oooh ... scary! But meaningless. The word "potentially" gives it away. I think you are really saying "he has a internet connection in which all incoming packets are not blocked, ?therefore? (maybe) he can be contacted". So ^&((^ WHAT? This isn't windows you know! (i.e. the fact that you can be talked to doesn't mean that you are in danger of being infected with horrible electronic diseases). And incoming packets can't really be blocked if you want to talk out, because communication is 2-way. And you can only be contacted from outside if you have some server running on a given port. Now why are you running it if you don't ant it to be contacted? And if you want it to be contacted, but not from utide your own network, then why haven't yu configured it like that? A firewall merely prevents certain specified froms of accss (either way). It doesn't stop physical access. It doesn't stop trojans. It doesn't stop you doibg something silly on a web page (java stops that). It doesn't stop you running something you received in the mail. In short, it's only use is on a multimachine network where the admin can't be boothered to or does not have authority to go round all the machines on the local network turning off or reconfiguring services which are not intended. But you, of course, have no such problem! Unless you are running a windows machine. And then the windows machine is the problem. Firewall security: Problems with simple Samba file share 3576 Peter T. Breuer No. I'm saying he's put all of his protection on one device. That's something... Peter
|
||||
Firewall security: Problems with simple Samba file share 3576 Linux groups from Newsgroups The #1 Usenet Provider on the Internet
Firewall security: Problems with simple Samba file share 3574 |
||||