|
North American Network Operators Group Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical Re: Port blocking last resort in fight against virus
On Tue, 12 Aug 2003, Randy Bush wrote: > > Is it just me that feels that blocking a port which is known to be used > > to perform billions of scans is only proper? > > the second, and important part of the, question is whether there > are legitimate packets to that port which want to cross your border. > for 135, i am not aware of any that should cross my site's border > un-tunneled. Who should determine what protocols can cross your site's border router? You or your ISP (ignoring the fact a lot of people on this list are their own ISP)? 80% or more of customers wouldn't notice if you blocked everything on their connection except HTTP/HTTPS and DNS. So why do ISPs let all the other infection laden protocols reach their customers? Fix spam - block port 25 Fix Slammer - block port 1434 Fix Blaster - block port 135 Fix KaZaA - block everything I think filters/firewalls are usefull. I believe every computer should have one. I have several. I just disagree on who should control the filters.
|