Ethical Hacking

Learn to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do! Gain real world hands on hacking experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Course designed and taught by expert instructors with years of penetration testing experience. 12 student maximum in every class. Certification attempt included in every package.
Computer Forensics Training at InfoSec Institute

Gain the in-demand skills of a certified computer examiner, learn to recover trace data left behind by fraud, theft, and cybercrime perpetrators. Discover the source of computer crime and abuse at your organization so that it never happens again. All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 12 students or less to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors.




Network Security Security-Basics
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Lots of incoming traffic on UDP 1026 and UDP 1027?

Subject: Re: Lots of incoming traffic on UDP 1026 and UDP 1027?
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 21:08:17 -0600
Thanks for the info, guys.

I never said I was getting DDOS, that was the first replier.

I guess "hammered" is a pretty strong word.  I simply meant that my
usually quiet firewall self-log has recently gotten quite large, and
it's not with port scans and HTTP, it's only UDP 1026 and 1027. 
Usually one right after the other from each IP address.

This is my home ISP running through a NetScreen 5.  The only ports
that are open are 2200 which maps to port 22 on my BSD box for SSH,
and 21 which maps to the same box for passive FTP.

I do occasionally open up RDP to a Windows 2000 box for my wife to use
while she's at work, but only upon request.

Regardless, my IP address isn't published anywhere for the public to
use.  My wife and I are the only authorized users, so a firewall
misconfiguration should not cause a nominal amount of unsolicited
incoming traffic.  Most of our outbound traffic is web surfing and
telnet BBS MUD's.  Nothing spectacular.

A lot of the unsolicited attempts are coming from others on my same
ISP.  Others come from asia and whatnot, which makes sense.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>