Re: is it rational to close the 139 port
lina <lina.lastname <at> gmail.com>
2012-07-22 08:44:13 GMT
On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 4:35 PM, Joe <joe <at> jretrading.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jul 2012 15:59:29 +0800
> lina <lina.lastname <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 3:49 PM, Andrei POPESCU
>> <andreimpopescu <at> gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Du, 22 iul 12, 15:41:16, lina wrote:
>> >> Thanks, I don't have some basic understanding about samba,
>> >> will read something about it.
>> >> just a short quick question, is it necessary to keep it?
>> > Only you can tell since we don't know what you use/need.
>> I felt a bit silly to ask, and a bit annoyed about myself for knowing
>> so little.
>> seems no need to share files with outside.
>> have rejected all inbound towards the port 139 and 445.
> These ports should never be open to the Net, or any potentially hostile
> computers, as there is a great deal of activity by bots looking for open
> Windows shares.
> If this machine is part of a network which shares files using the
> Windows SMB protocol, and this machine hosts shares, then the ports
> need to be open to the other network machines. If it's a standalone
> computer, or doesn't host any shares, you don't need samba running at
> all, or even installed. If you need to access SMB shares on other
> machines, the client programs to do this do not need the main samba
> program to be installed.