Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- From: "David H. Lipman" <DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2005 16:32:16 GMT
From: "Virus Guy" <Virus@xxxxxxx>
| "David H. Lipman" wrote:
|
|>> I wonder if DSL or cable modems can be remotely configured by
|>> the ISP to block 135 and 139, or at least be shipped that way(?)
>>
>> Modems no.
|
| So ISP's have no ability to stop port 135/137/139 traffic between
| subscribers?
|
| Even though that is one of the most common ways that vulnerable
| systems get infected?
|
| (they seem to have the ability to block port 445 because I never see
| that in my logs)
|
| Why haven't modems been shipped for the past few years with those
| ports permenantly blocked (in or out-bound) ???
|
| Wouldn't that have been easy, and stopped a lot of infections ???
It is not that they can't, they are reluctant do do so. It will vary from ISP to ISP. For
example, Verizon blocks incoming TCP port 80 to residential customers in former Bellatlantic
regions. Comacast may be blocking NetBIOS over IP.
Modems are not layer 3 devices. They don't filter protocols. They work on Layer 1 or Layer
2 of the OSI model.
Manufacturers will NOT have permanent blocks on ports simply because that will reduce the
functionality of the devices in applications where the protocol passage is desirable.
--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
http://www.ik-cs.com/got-a-virus.htm
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- From: Virus Guy
- Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- References:
- New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- From: Scott Bolander
- Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- From: Virus Guy
- Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- From: David H. Lipman
- Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- From: Virus Guy
- New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- Prev by Date: Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- Next by Date: Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- Previous by thread: Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- Next by thread: Re: New virus - VERY DANGEROUS!
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading