Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21

Thread: SG has a port scan/security test now!

  1. #1
    Assistant Admin Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    12,057

    Lightbulb SG has a port scan/security test now!

    Yeah, it is still being added to, however it is a start! Get it here:
    http://www.speedguide.net/scan.php

    Please let us know your thoughts of it...
    Thanks!
    Ken

  2. #2
    Advanced Member neo960's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    612
    It is nice and fast, but I get this weird message:

    Login (or register) for a more complete security scan.

    Even though I am logged in, I still get this message.

  3. #3
    Assistant Admin Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    12,057
    Thanks for bringing that point up. A little work on the back end remains. For now, you should see an area, mid page on the left to log in. Same user name and password as the boards...
    Ken

  4. #4
    Advanced Member neo960's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    612
    Tried it and it worked this time. Isn't it odd that even though I am logged in to post messages, it requires a second time login for the security scan?

  5. #5
    Assistant Admin Ken's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Tampa
    Posts
    12,057
    Anyone...?

  6. #6
    Regular Member Mondiol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Muckluck
    Posts
    249
    i passed the test! what do i get??
    "I can't believe it! Reading and writing actually paid off!"

  7. #7
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,363
    Blog Entries
    6
    Originally posted by Mondiol
    i passed the test! what do i get??
    A cookie ?
    Linux is user friendly, it's just picky about its friends...
    Disclaimer: Please use caution when opening messages, my grasp on reality may have shaken loose during transmission (going on rusty memory circuits).
    ๑۩۞۩๑

  8. #8
    Member WhiteMountains's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    75
    The scan worked good but it only goes to port 1024 and my virus set IE tcp to a port above 1024 and udp is set to 1025 lol.
    I definately have a virus Im working on and the trojan seeker did not detect it because the trojan is using a copy of sygate firewall to protect itself hahahaha. (actually this isnt funny but what can you do?)
    get ure mojo risin

  9. #9
    bridgiejones
    Guest
    Great scan! This heap of junk passed the test. woo hoo!

  10. #10
    WireHead
    Guest

    Thumbs down Port Scan is on crack...

    I'm running linux. My firewall allows *nothing* but ssh. Nmap from another of my systems (at a different location) says so, as do many other web-based scanning tools. Yours makes me out to be some wide-open Windows box. About the only thing it did get right was my IP.

  11. #11
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,363
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Port Scan is on crack...

    Originally posted by WireHead
    I'm running linux. My firewall allows *nothing* but ssh. Nmap from another of my systems (at a different location) says so, as do many other web-based scanning tools. Yours makes me out to be some wide-open Windows box. About the only thing it did get right was my IP.
    I'd appreciate some more constructive feedback... What ports were reported open ? TCP/UDP ? Were you logged in when you tried the scan, or it was the non-member one ? What IP... nmap from the server to your IP that you used to post shows no open ports...

    TIA for the feedback, I can't reproduce that behaviour with our machines.
    Linux is user friendly, it's just picky about its friends...
    Disclaimer: Please use caution when opening messages, my grasp on reality may have shaken loose during transmission (going on rusty memory circuits).
    ๑۩۞۩๑

  12. #12
    SG Enthusiast FunK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Posts
    2,721
    Yeah, I'm running Linux too and while it did show a few ports open (ssh etc), it definitely didn't see my box as *any* flavor of Windows. Mine was the normal scan and I got what I expected (only a couple that seemed odd like tftp) but I have to look into that...
    Simply run adaware, spybot, ZoneAlarm, HijackThis, AVG, update windows daily, have a router, don't open e-mail, turn off action scripting, don't use P2P networks, don't violate EULAs, and wear a condom to get Windows secured.

    People say Linux is alot of work!

  13. #13
    Moderator Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    30,761
    Everything reported fine here. No open ports.

  14. #14
    davidhsherman
    Guest

    What is shown on Linux box!

    Ports 13,19,20,21,22(tcp and udp), 35,49,53,67,68,69,79,80,88,99,110 tcp/udp,113 udp,119,123,143,161 162,194,635,666,1025,1026,1027,1028,1029,1723,1863,2049,3150,5000,5631,5632,5678,6665,6666,6667,6668 ,6669,27374,31337,31789 and 31790.

    I thought that the Redhat 7.3 firewall was secured. I guess I won't sleep for awhile. Some of the ports I can see being opened and not filtered.

    I feel lonely!!

  15. #15
    WireHead
    Guest

    Unhappy Sorry, I've been busy.

    I should have answered earlier, but I was busy attending my brother's burrial.

    I had a ridiculous number of ports showing, but the interesting thing was they were *all* UDP ports except for port 22 tcp (which is correct). My system does not have any UDP ports open at all. I even got nmap to goof that way by selecting the UDP scan option. I think there may be a problem with the UDP scan of nmap, which would explain the results I received here. UDP has no concept of a connection. It throws out a packet and hopes for the best. My firewall drops them on the floor instead of replying that the port is closed, so I think the lack of response is being mis-interpereted as an open port. Of course I'm not an expert at this, so I could be all wrong.

  16. #16
    davidhsherman
    Guest

    I scan at home

    I scanned at home with different result. At home using a Linksys router, 121 ports were scanned and all 121 ports were shown as filtered.
    I passed my results to someone else and we will talk about it next week.

  17. #17
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,363
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: Sorry, I've been busy.

    Originally posted by WireHead
    I should have answered earlier, but I was busy attending my brother's burrial.

    I had a ridiculous number of ports showing, but the interesting thing was they were *all* UDP ports except for port 22 tcp (which is correct). My system does not have any UDP ports open at all. I even got nmap to goof that way by selecting the UDP scan option. I think there may be a problem with the UDP scan of nmap, which would explain the results I received here. UDP has no concept of a connection. It throws out a packet and hopes for the best. My firewall drops them on the floor instead of replying that the port is closed, so I think the lack of response is being mis-interpereted as an open port. Of course I'm not an expert at this, so I could be all wrong.
    My condolences, sorry to hear about your brother...

    You actually hit the nail on the head with your answer, UDP scans are not as reliable as TCP. I believe if you scan over 25 ports with nmap and all drop packets nmap shows them as filtered, rather than open...

    If anyone is having problems with all their UDP ports showing as open, please LMK, send me a PM with your IP so I can test and try to reproduce this, TIA.
    Linux is user friendly, it's just picky about its friends...
    Disclaimer: Please use caution when opening messages, my grasp on reality may have shaken loose during transmission (going on rusty memory circuits).
    ๑۩۞۩๑

  18. #18
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,363
    Blog Entries
    6

    Re: What is shown on Linux box!

    Originally posted by davidhsherman
    Ports 13,19,20,21,22(tcp and udp), 35,49,53,67,68,69,79,80,88,99,110 tcp/udp,113 udp,119,123,143,161 162,194,635,666,1025,1026,1027,1028,1029,1723,1863,2049,3150,5000,5631,5632,5678,6665,6666,6667,6668 ,6669,27374,31337,31789 and 31790.

    I thought that the Redhat 7.3 firewall was secured. I guess I won't sleep for awhile. Some of the ports I can see being opened and not filtered.

    I feel lonely!!
    If many of those ports we shown as closed, rather than filtered your box is still not accepting connections to them, just that they are not filtered by a firewall...

    Some of the ones that are open, like 22tcp (SSH) and 113tcp IDENT might need to be left open even if you're behind a firewall. Many firewalls leave port 113 closed, rather than filtered...
    Linux is user friendly, it's just picky about its friends...
    Disclaimer: Please use caution when opening messages, my grasp on reality may have shaken loose during transmission (going on rusty memory circuits).
    ๑۩۞۩๑

  19. #19
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,363
    Blog Entries
    6
    Here is some additional infomration on NMAP:

    If it scans over 25 UDP ports, and ALL of them do not respond, it assumes they are all filtered. If, however, a couple are "closed" rather than "filtered" by a firewall, i.e. if a couple return "closed" state, then all the rest are reported as open, even if they do not respond at all.
    Linux is user friendly, it's just picky about its friends...
    Disclaimer: Please use caution when opening messages, my grasp on reality may have shaken loose during transmission (going on rusty memory circuits).
    ๑۩۞۩๑

  20. #20
    Administrator Philip's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Jacksonville, Florida, United States
    Posts
    10,363
    Blog Entries
    6
    All known issues with the Security scan should be resolved now. updated version of the SG portscan up and running as of today.
    Linux is user friendly, it's just picky about its friends...
    Disclaimer: Please use caution when opening messages, my grasp on reality may have shaken loose during transmission (going on rusty memory circuits).
    ๑۩۞۩๑

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •