"*Vanguard*" <no-> wrote in message
news

sHBb.496296$Tr4.1350930@attbi_s03...
> "RadarG" wrote
> in news:CvFBb.16457$Yt4.2290@lakeread05:
> > I went to GRC shields up and ran a scan and it said that port 113 was
> > closed. How do I stealth it? I would like to close these ports that i
> > am not using. But isnt stealthing better? thanks Justin
>
> There is a link to an article on just that exact shortcoming. As I
> recall, I ran the test, saw the one port detected, and saw a link there
> about that problem.
>
> Short story is: define a virtual server in your router. Your NAT router
> has its own DHCP server to allocate dynamically assigned IP addresses
> which is how your hosts are configured to use DHCP (some routers let you
> assign static IP addresses). There is a range of IP addresses that the
> router's DHCP server is allowed from which it will assign IP addresses.
> So pick an IP address outside that range that the DHCP server will use.
> Then define a route through your router from the WAN-side port 113 to
> the IP address for this non-existent host. The ident/AUTH is tried,
> goes to port 113 on the router, the router funnels it off to the
> LAN-side IP address for the server, the server doesn't exist, and the
> request falls into the bit bucket because there's nothing there to
> respond. I picked an IP address that was outside what the NAT router's
> DHCP server can assign to make sure that this non-existent virtual
> server didn't accidently become one of the internal hosts. The NAT
> router's DHCP server can never assign that out-of-bounds IP address.
>
>
> --
> __________________________________________________ __________
> *** Post replies to newsgroup. E-mail is not accepted. ***
> __________________________________________________ __________
>
>
> Thanks for the info