MIDRANGE dot COM Mailing List Archive



Home » MIDRANGE-L » August 2001

Re: red worm inside private network?



fixed

Jim,

        If any of the standard ports are NAT Mapped from a public to the
private address then the private address would not be any protection from
this worm as I understand it's replication process.  Only a server that is
entirely isolated behind a wall would be protected, and then only if it did
not have an unprotected peer who could see it and the Internet.

Jeffrey M. Silberberg
Independent Consultant
CompuDesigns, Inc.
(770) 399-9464

AS SOON AS I KNOW THE ANSWERS
THEY CHANGE THE QUESTIONS

----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Franz <franz400@triad.rr.com>
To: <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>; IGNITE400 MEMBERS LIST
<ign_list@ignite400.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2001 12:42 PM
Subject: red worm inside private network?


> has anyone found red worm infecting private (10.0.1.xxx) networked
servers?
> (we just did- am going to "kill -9" the net admin who said "every" NT was
> patched.
> jim franz
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MIDRANGE-L mailing list
> MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l








Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2014 by MIDRANGE dot COM and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available here. If you have questions about this, please contact