Funny Lines in Access_log

I actually did what some "hacker" tried to do: used my web browser and asked
for port 6667. I didn't use nmap on this port, just on the IP of the
machine. I am also unfamiliar with the sS switches you referred to. I'll
man nmap and learn more.

d

"Doug Holtz" <dholtz@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
news:4UIUf.29998$ty4.24092@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Yes, I'm moving and time is a factor. I turned the server off. I checked
> the logs and I ran nmap against the machine from my CentOS machine and
> port 6667 came back "denied" or something. If I didn't like this stuff, I
> wouldn't be bothering. Thanks for helping.
>
> Doug
>
> "james godwin" <jgodwin@j9n35c.invalid> wrote in message
> news:48e79dFjsps4U1@individual.net...
>> "Doug Holtz NOSPAM in adress" <dholtzNOSPAM@wi.rr.com> wrote in message
>> :QclUf.14002$Eg2.5155@tornado.rdc-kc.rr.com
>>
>>> I believe the error codes are 405 and 311. This IP address tried
>>> twice in a 13 minute span and didn't come back. I haven't run nmap
>>> or nslookup or anything on this address. I don't have time.
>>
>> Let's see, you have the time to make several Usenet posts about the
>> matter,
>> but don't have the few seconds it will take to type the commands
>> "nslookup -sil www.xxx.yyy.zzz" or (as root) "nmap -sS www.xxx.yyy.zzz" ?
>>
>
>

Doug Holtz NOSPAM in adress <dholtzNOSPAM@wi.rr.com> wrote:
> Thanks group.
>
> My Red Hat 7.3 with updates is down :( I will think about what to do with
> it in the future.
>
> In the meantime a new CentOS 4.3 is in it's place on a different box. I
> hope this is secure. I still need to check my logs regarding response codes
> and will do it soon.

I think you'll be happy with CentOS, based on what you said of your
usage scenario. That's not to denigrate Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which
comes packaged with a service contract that obviously meets many
customers' needs, but CentOS struck me as a more natural RH 7.3
successor for your needs.

You'll have a lot of improvements to get used to, starting with the yum
updater. But that's good news, in case it wasn't obvious.

--
Cheers,
Rick Moen Habetis bona deum.
rick@linuxmafia.com

"Rick Moen" <rick@linuxmafia.com> wrote in message
news:9c4c4$443b1b04$c690c3ba$14416@TSOFT.COM...
> Doug Holtz NOSPAM in adress <dholtzNOSPAM@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>> Thanks group.
>>
>> My Red Hat 7.3 with updates is down :( I will think about what to do
>> with
>> it in the future.
>>
>> In the meantime a new CentOS 4.3 is in it's place on a different box. I
>> hope this is secure. I still need to check my logs regarding response
>> codes
>> and will do it soon.
>
> I think you'll be happy with CentOS, based on what you said of your
> usage scenario. That's not to denigrate Red Hat Enterprise Linux, which
> comes packaged with a service contract that obviously meets many
> customers' needs, but CentOS struck me as a more natural RH 7.3
> successor for your needs.
>
> You'll have a lot of improvements to get used to, starting with the yum
> updater. But that's good news, in case it wasn't obvious.
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Rick Moen Habetis bona
> deum.
> rick@linuxmafia.com

Rick;

Yes, I like CentOS a lot. I can run newer geneweb software as well. I
haven't upgraded the RH 7.3 box yet but anticipate doing so soon. Meanwhile
I have it on a P4 workstation pretending to be a server.

Doug