On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 08:49 -0400, Claude Jones wrote: > On Thu April 17 2008, Claude Jones wrote: > > > or open ports 137 & 138 because that would be significantly > > > easier and according to his firewall listing...they aren't > > > open. > > > > it shall be done - will report results late evening > > I had thought they WERE open, but I checked. According to the Firestarter GUI > I've enabled SMB inbound which is supposed to open "137-139 445" (exactly as > its displayed in the GUI); I read that as meaning 137,138,139, and 445 -- in > poring over those rules I posted, I couldn't figure out how you adduced that > I hadn't opened 138 - could you tell me what led you to that conclusion? Is > something staring me in the face (perfectly possible). > > In any event, I did find some other 'issues' last night - in running > system-config-network at some point, I got an error message about my hosts > file; I found that the loop-back entry was configured 1127.0.0.1 and there > was a line at the beginning of the file about not removing the following > lines which didn't have a # at the beginning - fixed those. > > Left the firewall turned on when I went to bed. All is still up this am. But > that also happenned yesterday... We'll see. > > Vikram is talking in his reply to your post about seeing something in the > system-config-network GUI about ports required for SMB -- I don't see > anything like that, so I'm not sure what he's looking at... ---- I don't use firestarter and haven't looked at it in years. as for ports... netbios-ns 137/tcp # NETBIOS Name Service netbios-dgm 138/tcp # NETBIOS Datagram Service I saw neither these descriptions (tcp or udp) nor their 137/138 numbers appear in your iptables dump that you sent to the mail list. My deduction that these ports were not included in your firewall listing was simply noting the lack of presence of those ports in your listing. I believe that port 138 is only UDP traffic...don't know if TCP or UDP on port 137. I enable both TCP & UDP for smb traffic. Craig
