Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Security > Port scan attempts

Reply
Thread Tools

Port scan attempts

 
 
Bit Twister
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-25-2003
On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 11:07:06 +0530, Ravi wrote:

This is off topic for this news group.

> Ok. I finally managed to use SLRN!!!
>>So what settings have you made?

>
> OK. Thanks and sorry for sucking your blood.


You can do a
locate slrn.rc
for switches.


Today's Tip of the Day, very large
Frequently Asked Questions (faq) Search engine:

http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
slrnrc red bittwister in the first box
*mandrake* in the Newsgroup, pick English

Click Re: Statistics for alt.os.linux.mandrake
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Ravi
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-25-2003
On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 05:45:38 GMT, Bit Twister
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 11:07:06 +0530, Ravi wrote:
>
>This is off topic for this news group.
>
>> Ok. I finally managed to use SLRN!!!
>>>So what settings have you made?

>>
>> OK. Thanks and sorry for sucking your blood.

>
>You can do a
> locate slrn.rc
>for switches.
>
>
>Today's Tip of the Day, very large
>Frequently Asked Questions (faq) Search engine:
>
>http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
>slrnrc red bittwister in the first box
>*mandrake* in the Newsgroup, pick English
>
>Click Re: Statistics for alt.os.linux.mandrake


I read that - are you saying that I must change the colors
for slrn? Any way I will not be using it

--
main(){char s[37]="CSbwjAjocpy/mw!PS!sbwjAeftqbnnfe/dpn";
int i;for(i=0;i<36;putchar(s[i++]-1));return 0;}
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bit Twister
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-25-2003
On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 11:50:28 +0530, Ravi wrote:

> I read that - are you saying that I must change the colors for slrn?


No, you had asked

> So what settings have you made?

 
Reply With Quote
 
Ravi
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      12-25-2003
On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 05:45:38 GMT, Bit Twister
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 11:07:06 +0530, Ravi wrote:
>
>This is off topic for this news group.
>
>> Ok. I finally managed to use SLRN!!!
>>>So what settings have you made?

>>
>> OK. Thanks and sorry for sucking your blood.

>
>You can do a
> locate slrn.rc
>for switches.
>
>
>Today's Tip of the Day, very large
>Frequently Asked Questions (faq) Search engine:
>
>http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
>slrnrc red bittwister in the first box
>*mandrake* in the Newsgroup, pick English
>
>Click Re: Statistics for alt.os.linux.mandrake


You should have written this below:
>>>So what settings have you made?


To indicate you were answering _that_ question.

Any way I guess this thread is over.

Good bye and merry christmas!

--
main(){char s[37]="CSbwjAjocpy/mw!PS!sbwjAeftqbnnfe/dpn";
int i;for(i=0;i<36;putchar(s[i++]-1));return 0;}
 
Reply With Quote
 
Alan P
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-13-2004

Imagine if you had reported the incident, and Symantec's ISP decided to
disconnect Symantec...

Wouldn't that be odd

"Ravi" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ...
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "Colonel Flagg"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) says...
> >> On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 19:00:47 GMT, Bit Twister
> >> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 00:09:02 +0530, Ravi wrote:
> >> >> "Date: 22/12/2003 Time: 22:52:16 (GMT +5:30) Port scan detected from
> >> >> address 206.204.10.200. Blocked further access for 30 minutes after
> >> >> detecting at least 6 ports being probed."
> >> >>
> >> >> Is there a way I can report abouse for this?
> >> >>
> >> >> It appears that I must report abuse to: (E-Mail Removed)
> >> >>
> >> >> but that address is invalid - I believe.
> >> >>
> >> >> So what can I do?
> >> >
> >> >Let's see,
> >> >host 206.204.10.200
> >> >200.10.204.206.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer security.symantec.com.
> >> >
> >> >Hmm, belongs to symantec.com
> >> >
> >> >I bet there may be a Contact Us in their web page http://symantec.com/
> >>
> >> If that is correct then my mistake!
> >> I actually asked them to scan my ports using their security check site.
> >>
> >> But then is not the abuse address that I wrote correct?
> >>
> >> TIA.
> >>
> >>
> >>

> >
> > you're an idiot.

>
> I have already posted a response. I have no idea why it has not appeared.
> Any way all I said was that everyone can make a mistake.
>
> I did not know the ip belonged to symantec.
>
> Now I am posting this from linux I just hope this appears!
>
> >
> > go ahead folks, find some small way to state this guy isn't an idiot....
> > I dare you.... he ASK symantec to scan him, then he REPORTS them for
> > abuse....
> >
> >
> >



 
Reply With Quote
 
jhayc
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-15-2004
laffin my head off here fella he he
"Alan P" <alan@(nojunkplease)alancode.net> wrote in message
news:bu0l6e$6fd$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> Imagine if you had reported the incident, and Symantec's ISP decided to
> disconnect Symantec...
>
> Wouldn't that be odd
>
> "Ravi" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:(E-Mail Removed) ...
> > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, "Colonel

Flagg"
> > <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> > > In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> > > (E-Mail Removed) says...
> > >> On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 19:00:47 GMT, Bit Twister
> > >> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 00:09:02 +0530, Ravi wrote:
> > >> >> "Date: 22/12/2003 Time: 22:52:16 (GMT +5:30) Port scan detected

from
> > >> >> address 206.204.10.200. Blocked further access for 30 minutes

after
> > >> >> detecting at least 6 ports being probed."
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Is there a way I can report abouse for this?
> > >> >>
> > >> >> It appears that I must report abuse to: (E-Mail Removed)
> > >> >>
> > >> >> but that address is invalid - I believe.
> > >> >>
> > >> >> So what can I do?
> > >> >
> > >> >Let's see,
> > >> >host 206.204.10.200
> > >> >200.10.204.206.in-addr.arpa domain name pointer

security.symantec.com.
> > >> >
> > >> >Hmm, belongs to symantec.com
> > >> >
> > >> >I bet there may be a Contact Us in their web page

http://symantec.com/
> > >>
> > >> If that is correct then my mistake!
> > >> I actually asked them to scan my ports using their security check

site.
> > >>
> > >> But then is not the abuse address that I wrote correct?
> > >>
> > >> TIA.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > you're an idiot.

> >
> > I have already posted a response. I have no idea why it has not

appeared.
> > Any way all I said was that everyone can make a mistake.
> >
> > I did not know the ip belonged to symantec.
> >
> > Now I am posting this from linux I just hope this appears!
> >
> > >
> > > go ahead folks, find some small way to state this guy isn't an

idiot....
> > > I dare you.... he ASK symantec to scan him, then he REPORTS them for
> > > abuse....
> > >
> > >
> > >

>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon Scan vs Vuescan, Nikon Scan smears detail, why (0/1) melbjer@hotmail.com Digital Photography 3 08-09-2008 02:52 AM
Best to scan in 48 Bit HDR? Or use 48 Bit + modify during scan? NewScanner Digital Photography 9 01-16-2007 04:07 AM
Attempts on UDP Port 18332 DaveG NZ Computing 1 03-07-2005 12:23 AM
What do you can a scan that attempts to establish a connection with open port with two small packets todhunter5 Computer Security 1 12-24-2003 04:37 AM
Progressive scan dvd's on a non-progressive scan tv jack lift DVD Video 7 12-09-2003 06:01 PM



Advertisments