All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ken A <ka@pacific.net>
To: Mail List - Netfilter <netfilter@lists.netfilter.org>
Subject: Re: a whitelist for outgoing syn port 80, 443 traffic for hosting
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 11:04:53 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <45CB7455.4070200@pacific.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0702081313520.12171@darkstar.sysinfo.com>



R. DuFresne wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, franck wrote:
> 
>> --[PinePGP]--------------------------------------------------[begin]--
>> Ken A wrote:
>>>>>> Is anyone aware of a whitelist of hostnames of port 80,443 OUTGOING
>>>>>> traffic that should be considered 'normal' in a hosting environment?
>>>>>> ie: SYN traffic to ups.com, authorize.net, technorati, for ecommerce,
>>>>>> blogging, etc..
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Categorizing traffic as good/bad is useful in this day of many php
>>>>>> remote file include bugs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Maybe this is what you are looking for :
>>>
>>> http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/zero/
>>>
>>>> Thanks, but I'm looking for a whitelist for a fairly wide range of web
>>>> applications, not a blacklist. There are plenty of good blacklists out
>>>> there. surbl.org, uribl.com , etc. :-)
>>>> Ken
>>
>>
>> As a matter of fact, I thought something you can put in a blacklist
>> could be useful, because it cannot be in the whitelist you are looking
>> for. But, thinking about it again, it is quite clear I would prefer a
>> small whitelist rather than a very huge blacklist.
>>
> 
> 
> Would this not require that one beable to conclude that such "whitelist" 
> ensures tha the hosts in it are "secure"  have never been compromised, 
> and never will be compromised?   If this is what is sought, such a list
> would be impossible to build. 

What I need is a list of hosts that are commonly connected to via port 
80,443 by common web applications in a common web hosting environment, 
with blogs & shopping carts. Perhaps 'whitelist' was a bad choice of 
words? I don't think the DoD would use this list. The security of remote 
systems in such a list is of significant importance, but, the difference 
between allowing outgoing SYN packets to ups.com as opposed to 
geocities.com is level of trust.

Ken A.
Pacific.Net


  It is not possible to ensure the
> integrity of a system over time, only at a point in time to the dregree 
> the server was audited to.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Ron DuFresne


      reply	other threads:[~2007-02-08 19:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-02-07 17:23 a whitelist for outgoing syn port 80, 443 traffic for hosting Ken A
2007-02-07 18:40 ` franck
2007-02-07 19:05   ` Grant Taylor
2007-02-07 19:09   ` Ken A
2007-02-07 20:24     ` franck
2007-02-08 18:15       ` R. DuFresne
2007-02-08 19:04         ` Ken A [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=45CB7455.4070200@pacific.net \
    --to=ka@pacific.net \
    --cc=netfilter@lists.netfilter.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.