On Wednesday 2005-August-31 12:32 GMT, afshin lamei <afshinlamei@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Go and try to use your brain (if there is any!!) to understand the > things, instead of teaching others :D > > On 8/31/05, /dev/rob0 <rob0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday 2005-August-31 07:04, afshin lamei wrote: > > > what's the problem? > > > > http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html Three minutes prior to this one, was another: ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: hey! Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:59:39 +0430 From: afshin lamei <afshinlamei@xxxxxxxxx> To: /dev/rob0 <rob0@xxxxxxxxx> I'm not kidding, if your brain is not able to understand such a simple questions, go and try to change it :D ------------------------------------------------------- This poster was not capable of comprehending numerous things, it seems, one of which being why I gave that reply. For the record here is the original post in full: ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: problem with psd match Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2005 16:34:03 +0430 From: afshin lamei <afshinlamei@xxxxxxxxx> To: netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Hi all, I'm using the psd (port scan detector) , dropping all packets that match with psd and it works well with default values. but when I use the retina port scanner, it says that ports 25 (smtp) and 110 (pop3) are open. I have not any mail application and my box is not listening on these ports (netstat -an --inet proves this). all default policies (iptables -P ) are set to DROP. what's the problem? regards afshin lamei ------------------------------------------------------- There could be any number of reasons why the scanner might have gotten results which seem to be at odds with reality. In fact that number is indeterminable, nearly infinite. No information is provided in the post which might help narrow down the likely cause. Why, list members, do I trouble you with this, which was intended as a private exchange? I do not suppose that this poster would be embarrassed; that would require a greater level of understanding. I only want to point out to others that the poster might have been better suited by reading the link than by banging out a pair of hate mails. We're not mind readers here. (Some of us might be; only they know who they are. They dare not reveal themselves to us, because we would expect them to solve all our problems for us!) Also: people who follow good methodical debugging procedures ("scientific method") tend to find they have fewer mysterious issues. When you set out all the facts such as you know them, so that someone else can take a look, often you will find the answer. My MUA "drafts" folder is full of unsent posts! This was almost 2 weeks ago. As per the .sig below, this is not an account I regularly read. Here's another gripe ... many posters are more than willing to take from the group's knowledge, but are unwilling (or unable) to contribute anything back. When you post a question you have an implicit obligation to pursue it until solved, and to post that solution back to the list, even if the solution reveals your foolishness. I think this list is a little worse than most in that regard. I'm not sure why that is. We seem to get a higher than typical share of completely clueless posts. It's frustrating to those who are trying to help, as we saw back in July. Jason (not sure if he's still here!) got annoyed with a poster who not only didn't check the list archives, he wasn't reading active threads on the same issue! -- mail to this address is discarded unless "/dev/rob0" or "not-spam" is in Subject: header
