nanog mailing list archives
Re: Port scanning legal
From: Alex Rubenstein <alex () nac net>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2000 14:06:04 -0500 (Eastern Standard Time)
On Tue, 19 Dec 2000, Shawn McMahon wrote:
How many ports must be scanned before you deem it an attack? Is one port enough? Five? 50?
I don't deem a port scan as vicious or an attack.
If you pick a number here, is that arbitrary, or do you have a valid logical (and legally-supportable) reason for the number?
No.
If one port is sufficient, then the act of typing an IP address into a web browser to see if there's a web server listening is a crime.
Agreed, which is why I said the first.
Current thread:
- Port scanning legal Edward S. Marshall (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Jeff Wheat (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Patrick Evans (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal John Fraizer (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Shawn McMahon (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Alex Rubenstein (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Deepak Jain (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Leo Bicknell (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Jeff Wheat (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Valdis . Kletnieks (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal mdevney (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Christian Kuhtz (Dec 19)
- Re: Port scanning legal Todd Suiter (Dec 19)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- RE: Port scanning legal Mark Borchers (Dec 19)
- RE: Port scanning legal Roeland Meyer (Dec 19)