Re: all port scan attack notifications



Here's my opinion:

As long as you have verified from the outside that you don't have anything
exposed that shouldn't be, and you periodically re-confirm that, it's a
non-issue. You will be port-scanned from all over the world all the time.
Get used to it.

The threats you have to be really worried about are the ones where someone
has painted a target on your back specifically. Those attackers are not
going to use something as simple and noisy as a regular port scan. They may
scan you, but it may only be one port a day and if they're good, the source
IP will be rotated so you don't know it's the same attacker.

Detecting these types of attacks is expensive and time-consuming because
they require 100% monitoring and the ability to correlate an astronomical
number of events to find the pattern. For most companies, it's a better
tactic to throw as many hurdles in front of any attacker as you can.

If you don't do any business with Asia-Pacific, set an ACL on the router
between ISA & your ISP and drop those routes out. Minimize your footprint on
the Internet by using the bare minimum number of IP's. Make sure you use a
split DNS system to minimize mapping of your internal network. Use DMZ
techniques to limit damage. Have multiple layers of virus inspection. Use an
HTTP virus scanner on ISA. Set all of your users as Restricted Users no
matter how much they whine and moan. Block all outbound traffic except for
that which is specifically allowed (for example, don't allow SMTP outbound
except from the IP address of your mail server).

If someone is targeting you specifically, they will find a way in
eventually. Your main job is to minimize the damage and improve the
detection time when that happens.

Good luck,

Ray


"Rob" <Rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:792B4524-83A0-4EC8-8CAD-1B8A6050F649@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks Ray,
can you recomend any other method?
cheers

"Ray" wrote:

They're probably false alarms. ISA's port scan detection has been plagued
with this since day 1. Turn it off and forget about it (and use another
method of detection).

Ray

"Rob" <Rob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:520D36C2-73A6-47F9-A9E6-FB4CD04BA941@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
I've been getting notifications about all port scan attacks. From
these I
do some investigation and block the offending IP if necessary (if I can
tell
it's a ISP dial-up/ broadband I). I've recently had some thru that on
investigation turn out to be from a companies mail server. Why would a
mail
server be doing an all port scan attack - surely it would only want to
connect to port 25? Or is this just default text in the notification
and
there is not an actual 'attack'?
Any pointers gladly received.
thanks





.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Appeal for Help. NOT Code Red But Is It?
    ... our server immediately responds back to the prober ... What is happening is that the IDS is becomming confused about who the ... each worm that is still on its way from the attacker. ... > and outbound port was 2913. ...
    (Incidents)
  • Re: Question: FTP via alternate port
    ... detection techniques based on port. ... regarding your SQL server on the internal net; ... Why would you want to open your SQL server to the outside world? ... Theoretically an attacker could still compromise your SQL by hitting the ...
    (Pen-Test)
  • TCP 6129 - Dameware, TCP 17890 IIS.EXE, SVR1984.exe - Team Liquid
    ... Win2K advanced server, and during analysis I found that the DameWare remote ... service and listens on TCP port 6129 by default. ... have allowed the attacker to execute any command line could have been used. ... NAI says this about the RQ trojan: ...
    (Incidents)
  • Re: Attacker damaged my system via ssh. I m shocked.
    ... not x.x.x.x = attacker ip ... Don't allow password authentication for ssh, ... The port scanning programs only attack port 22. ... The server on port 22 is attacked several times a day, ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • porsentry
    ... attacker is scanning ... # IMPORTANT NOTE: You CAN NOT put spaces between your port arguments. ... # On many Linux systems you cannot bind above port 61000. ... # host when an attack is detected. ...
    (linux.redhat)