Home page logo

basics logo Security Basics mailing list archives

RE: Yet another thread on the legality of port scanning
From: "David Gillett" <gillettdavid () fhda edu>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2004 09:38:28 -0800

There are legitimate reasons for running a port scan on a 
computer in a limited fashion, such as service discovery. 

  Portscans don't discover services, just ports.

Would a reasonable man conclude that http://www.cnn.com is an 
acceptable connection in the absence of explicit 
permission?  I would
say yes, he would.  Would a reasonable man conclude that 
is an acceptable connection in the absence of explicit permission?
I would argue no, he would not.  

I would argue that you're wrong.  Anonymous FTP is a very frequent 
occurrance on the internet and it's not unreasonable to 
expect that CNN might have an anonymous FTP site for content.  
What, exactly, makes you think that it's an unreasonable service 
to use?

  If CNN wants to provide an anonymous FTP service, they're likely 
to put it on ftp://ftp.cnn.com .  www.cnn.com should almost certainly
be dedicated to web service, and any FTP service running on that box
is *probably* only intended for distribution of content updates to
the web site; if it accepts anonymous connections, that's more likely
by mistake than by design.  "Reasonable man" says that if they have
an intended anonymous FTP site, that's not where it is.

Dave Gillett

Ethical Hacking at the InfoSec Institute. Mention this ad and get $545 off 
any course! All of our class sizes are guaranteed to be 10 students or less 
to facilitate one-on-one interaction with one of our expert instructors. 
Attend a course taught by an expert instructor with years of in-the-field 
pen testing experience in our state of the art hacking lab. Master the skills 
of an Ethical Hacker to better assess the security of your organization. 
Visit us at: 

  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]