Port blocking?
Kevin
everything I can think of and can't get the game to see the ports.
I've shut down my firewalls, forwarded the ports on my router, and
eventually skipped the router and plugged straight into my cable
modem. Nothing. I called Comcast and was told they don't block ports.
If that's true, then I have to conclude that the problem is my modem,
since it's the only thing left between my computer and the 'net. But I
have a feeling Comcast's service rep (who was less than helpful) might
not have given my accurate information.
Any help?
RickMerrill
> I'm running a game that needs ports 8000 and 8001....
are you running any of these:
http://tinyurl.com/yc476pt
John
"Kevin" <paral...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:05b93743-e066-4418...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
Are you streaming anything while trying this?
--
John
jayw654
have there system screw with certain ports. In my case it's port: 21 which
is the primary port for FTP. Too bad you can't set the program to use a
different port, that's what i had to do to get around the port blocking
Barry Margolin
Bill <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
> Much more likely you just have something misconfigured.
>
> FTP over Port 21 works fine here, and you'd hear a lot more about it
> Comcast was actually messing with it. As it is, you're the only one
> complaining, so the problem is most likely at your end.
I've also never heard of Comcast blocking port 21, and I can't imagine
why they would do it.
--
Barry Margolin, bar...@alum.mit.edu
Arlington, MA
*** PLEASE don't copy me on replies, I'll read them in the group ***
Thomas T. Veldhouse
>>
>> FTP over Port 21 works fine here, and you'd hear a lot more about it
>> Comcast was actually messing with it. As it is, you're the only one
>> complaining, so the problem is most likely at your end.
>
> I've also never heard of Comcast blocking port 21, and I can't imagine
> why they would do it.
>
FTP is a common method of distributing warez [usually on hacked machines] and
thus can be just as devastating to a network as bittorrent if there is always
at least one user on the server downloading at full capacity. Better to block
the port than kick a user off for going over 250GB [they just assume a
compromise]. No amount of talking to them will get them to remove the block,
so I wouldn't try.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Religion is a crutch, but that's okay... humanity is a cripple.
Rick Merrill
" Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:
Action Taken: In an effort to help prevent spam and ensure the security
of our network and customers, Comcast has modified your modem�s settings
to prevent the sending of email on port 25. That is the default port
email programs such as Outlook Express use to send email. We�ve taken
this action because we may have detected virus-like activity from your
modem or received reports from other email providers that mail from your
modem generated complaints from their users. Please read this message to
understand how this action may impact your ability to send email and
what you should do next."
-Customer Security Assurance Notice
.. and another port bites the dust!
"Do ya feel more secure? Well do ya punk?"-Dirty Harry as the Cable Guy
Barry Margolin
Bill <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:34:02 -0500, Rick Merrill
> <Rick0....@gmail.spamless.com> wrote:
>
> >jayw654 wrote:
> >> yes, Comcast does block ports. Sometimes it's not a direct block but they
> >> do
> >> have there system screw with certain ports. In my case it's port: 21 which
> >> is the primary port for FTP. Too bad you can't set the program to use a
> >> different port, that's what i had to do to get around the port blocking
> >
> >" Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:
> >Action Taken: In an effort to help prevent spam and ensure the security
> >of our network and customers, Comcast has modified your modem�s settings
> >to prevent the sending of email on port 25. That is the default port
> >email programs such as Outlook Express use to send email. We�ve taken
> >this action because we may have detected virus-like activity from your
> >modem or received reports from other email providers that mail from your
> >modem generated complaints from their users. Please read this message to
> >understand how this action may impact your ability to send email and
> >what you should do next."
> >-Customer Security Assurance Notice
>
> This particular complaint was about port 21, not port 25.
>
> >.. and another port bites the dust!
>
> Not as far as I can see.
Right. Many ISPs block port 25 across the board. Comcast only does it
when they suspect a customer is spamming. They don't seem to require a
whole lot of evidence for this, so many people have had it blocked when
they were sure they weren't spamming (maybe all it takes is one
recipient to click on the "Report as spam" button, possibly by mistake).
But I still have never heard of Comcast blocking FTP.
Rick Merrill
> In article <qvh3g51jbfg932tg6...@4ax.com>,
> Bill <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:34:02 -0500, Rick Merrill
>> <Rick0....@gmail.spamless.com> wrote:
>>
>>> jayw654 wrote:
>>>> yes, Comcast does block ports. Sometimes it's not a direct block but they
>>>> do
>>>> have there system screw with certain ports. In my case it's port: 21 which
>>>> is the primary port for FTP. Too bad you can't set the program to use a
>>>> different port, that's what i had to do to get around the port blocking
>>> " Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:
>>> Action Taken: In an effort to help prevent spam and ensure the security
>>> modem or received reports from other email providers that mail from your
>>> modem generated complaints from their users. Please read this message to
>>> understand how this action may impact your ability to send email and
>>> what you should do next."
>>> -Customer Security Assurance Notice
>> This particular complaint was about port 21, not port 25.
>>
>>> .. and another port bites the dust!
>> Not as far as I can see.
>
> Right. Many ISPs block port 25 across the board. Comcast only does it
> when they suspect a customer is spamming. They don't seem to require a
> whole lot of evidence for this, so many people have had it blocked when
> they were sure they weren't spamming (maybe all it takes is one
> recipient to click on the "Report as spam" button, possibly by mistake).
>
> But I still have never heard of Comcast blocking FTP.
>
Apparently with the new modems they can block ports on an individual
subscriber basis. If you run an FTP server excessively yours could be
blocked.
Adam H. Kerman
>Barry Margolin wrote:
>> In article <qvh3g51jbfg932tg6...@4ax.com>,
>> Bill <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:34:02 -0500, Rick Merrill
>>> <Rick0....@gmail.spamless.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> jayw654 wrote:
>>>>> yes, Comcast does block ports. Sometimes it's not a direct block but they
>>>>> do
>>>>> have there system screw with certain ports. In my case it's port: 21 which
>>>>> is the primary port for FTP. Too bad you can't set the program to use a
>>>>> different port, that's what i had to do to get around the port blocking
>>>> " Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:
>>>> Action Taken: In an effort to help prevent spam and ensure the security
>>>> modem or received reports from other email providers that mail from your
>>>> modem generated complaints from their users. Please read this message to
>>>> understand how this action may impact your ability to send email and
>>>> what you should do next."
>>>> -Customer Security Assurance Notice
>>> This particular complaint was about port 21, not port 25.
>>>
>>>> .. and another port bites the dust!
>>> Not as far as I can see.
>>
>> Right. Many ISPs block port 25 across the board. Comcast only does it
>> when they suspect a customer is spamming. They don't seem to require a
>> whole lot of evidence for this, so many people have had it blocked when
>> they were sure they weren't spamming (maybe all it takes is one
>> recipient to click on the "Report as spam" button, possibly by mistake).
>>
>> But I still have never heard of Comcast blocking FTP.
>Apparently with the new modems they can block ports on an individual
>subscriber basis. If you run an FTP server excessively yours could be
>blocked.
I always figured that residential TOS/AUP said I couldn't run servers
at all, that I'd have to be a business subscriber to do that.
Barry Margolin
Rick Merrill <Rick0....@gmail.spamless.com> wrote:
> Barry Margolin wrote:
> > In article <qvh3g51jbfg932tg6...@4ax.com>,
> > Bill <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:34:02 -0500, Rick Merrill
> >> <Rick0....@gmail.spamless.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> jayw654 wrote:
> >>>> yes, Comcast does block ports. Sometimes it's not a direct block but
> >>>> they
> >>>> do
> >>>> have there system screw with certain ports. In my case it's port: 21
> >>>> which
> >>>> is the primary port for FTP. Too bad you can't set the program to use a
> >>>> different port, that's what i had to do to get around the port blocking
> >>> " Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:
> >>> Action Taken: In an effort to help prevent spam and ensure the security
> >>> of our network and customers, Comcast has modified your modem�s settings
> >>> to prevent the sending of email on port 25. That is the default port
> >>> email programs such as Outlook Express use to send email. We�ve taken
> >>> this action because we may have detected virus-like activity from your
> >>> modem or received reports from other email providers that mail from your
> >>> modem generated complaints from their users. Please read this message to
> >>> understand how this action may impact your ability to send email and
> >>> what you should do next."
> >>> -Customer Security Assurance Notice
> >> This particular complaint was about port 21, not port 25.
> >>
> >>> .. and another port bites the dust!
> >> Not as far as I can see.
> >
> > Right. Many ISPs block port 25 across the board. Comcast only does it
> > when they suspect a customer is spamming. They don't seem to require a
> > whole lot of evidence for this, so many people have had it blocked when
> > they were sure they weren't spamming (maybe all it takes is one
> > recipient to click on the "Report as spam" button, possibly by mistake).
> >
> > But I still have never heard of Comcast blocking FTP.
> >
>
> Apparently with the new modems they can block ports on an individual
> subscriber basis. If you run an FTP server excessively yours could be
> blocked.
They've been doing individual subscriber blocks for years, so what's
your point? But AFAIK, they only use this mechanism to block port 25.
This is still the first I've heard of them blocking port 21.
Thomas T. Veldhouse
>
> They've been doing individual subscriber blocks for years, so what's
> your point? But AFAIK, they only use this mechanism to block port 25.
>
> This is still the first I've heard of them blocking port 21.
>
Same here, although port 21 makes a lot of sense as it is one of the major
underground methods of transfering warez. I found the BSD daemon hacked on my
machine several times before I blocked external FTP and removed anonymous ...
that was when I was on DSL.
Rick Merrill
> Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> They've been doing individual subscriber blocks for years, so what's
>> your point? But AFAIK, they only use this mechanism to block port 25.
>>
>> This is still the first I've heard of them blocking port 21.
>>
>
> Same here, although port 21 makes a lot of sense as it is one of the major
> underground methods of transfering warez. I found the BSD daemon hacked on my
> machine several times before I blocked external FTP and removed anonymous ...
> that was when I was on DSL.
>
In the interest of full disclosure: I have run an FTP server on a
residential service - within 10 minutes there were breakin attempts from
all over the world. Said server is now behind a firewall that requires a
password - this has greatly reduced the ftp log file :-)
I presume that any docsis3 modem could be set to block any port - true
or false?
Thomas T. Veldhouse
I also presume the same, and further, I believe it applies to DOCSIS 1.1/2.0.
Barry Margolin
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <vel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> > They've been doing individual subscriber blocks for years, so what's
> > your point? But AFAIK, they only use this mechanism to block port 25.
> >
> > This is still the first I've heard of them blocking port 21.
> >
>
> Same here, although port 21 makes a lot of sense as it is one of the major
> underground methods of transfering warez. I found the BSD daemon hacked on my
> machine several times before I blocked external FTP and removed anonymous ...
> that was when I was on DSL.
While this is true, I've never heard of ISPs being put under pressure to
combate warez. They're expected to do something about mail abuse (spam
and viruses), which is why they routinely block port 25.
Thomas T. Veldhouse
>
> While this is true, I've never heard of ISPs being put under pressure to
> combate warez. They're expected to do something about mail abuse (spam
> and viruses), which is why they routinely block port 25.
>
I wasn't suggesting that they due it because of pressure. They do it to
dimish hacked FTP servers from spewing data upstream and now it saves the
customer from hitting the 250GB limit. Unless you are a very attentive admin,
you simply should not be running an open FTP server these days.
Barry Margolin
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <vel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Barry Margolin <bar...@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> >
> > While this is true, I've never heard of ISPs being put under pressure to
> > combate warez. They're expected to do something about mail abuse (spam
> > and viruses), which is why they routinely block port 25.
> >
>
> I wasn't suggesting that they due it because of pressure. They do it to
> dimish hacked FTP servers from spewing data upstream and now it saves the
> customer from hitting the 250GB limit. Unless you are a very attentive admin,
> you simply should not be running an open FTP server these days.
My understanding is that they wait for customers to hit the 250 GB limit
before they do anything about it. He would have gotten a warning letter
about excessive use. I've never heard of them proactively blocking
ports as a way to combat this.
Thomas T. Veldhouse
>
> My understanding is that they wait for customers to hit the 250 GB limit
> before they do anything about it. He would have gotten a warning letter
> about excessive use. I've never heard of them proactively blocking
> ports as a way to combat this.
>
They simply give you a warning if you hit 250GB in a single month and has
nothing to do with port blocking, which they do whenever the hell they feel
like it. I suspect they will start blocking port 80 if there is a lot of
traffic outgoing on that as well, although maybe not as I have not yet seen
them block a port in one direction only (i.e. when they blocked port 25 for me
it was both outgoing and incoming ... they since removed the block).
jayw654
On 18-Nov-2009, Rick Merrill <Rick0....@gmail.spamless.com> wrote:
> Barry Margolin wrote:
> > In article <qvh3g51jbfg932tg6...@4ax.com>,
> > Bill <no...@none.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:34:02 -0500, Rick Merrill
> >> <Rick0....@gmail.spamless.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> jayw654 wrote:
> >>>> yes, Comcast does block ports. Sometimes it's not a direct block but
> >>>> they
> >>>> do
> >>>> have there system screw with certain ports. In my case it's port: 21
> >>>> which
> >>>> is the primary port for FTP. Too bad you can't set the program to use
> >>>> a
> >>>> different port, that's what i had to do to get around the port
> >>>> blocking
> >>> " Dear Comcast High-Speed Internet Subscriber:
> >>> Action Taken: In an effort to help prevent spam and ensure the
> >>> security
> >>> of our network and customers, Comcast has modified your modem�s
> >>> settings
> >>> to prevent the sending of email on port 25. That is the default port
> >>> email programs such as Outlook Express use to send email. We�ve taken
> >>> this action because we may have detected virus-like activity from your
> >>>
> >>> modem or received reports from other email providers that mail from
> >>> your
> >>> modem generated complaints from their users. Please read this message
> >>> to
> >>> understand how this action may impact your ability to send email and
> >>> what you should do next."
> >>> -Customer Security Assurance Notice
> >> This particular complaint was about port 21, not port 25.
> >>
> >>> .. and another port bites the dust!
> >> Not as far as I can see.
> >
> > Right. Many ISPs block port 25 across the board. Comcast only does it
> > when they suspect a customer is spamming. They don't seem to require a
> > whole lot of evidence for this, so many people have had it blocked when
> > they were sure they weren't spamming (maybe all it takes is one
> > recipient to click on the "Report as spam" button, possibly by mistake).
> >
> > But I still have never heard of Comcast blocking FTP.
> >
>
> Apparently with the new modems they can block ports on an individual
> subscriber basis. If you run an FTP server excessively yours could be
> blocked.
That makes no sense has I use a different port and have no issues, It's the
ftp and sftp default ports. If I change it to use another port like port 79
or 81 which i do use i can slam it till the cows come home.
jayw654
These blocks are handle at the comcast servers but different areas have
different restrictions. Not because there are different rules but because
sometimes the workers that config these servers forget to block certain
ports and don't untill they see a major issue. This is why some people have
issues and others don't depends on the area and the people who service it
and the problems they run into.
Barry Margolin
"jayw654" <id...@know.com> wrote:
We're not talking about blocking ports on Comcast-operated servers,
we're talking about blocking ports on the subscriber's modem.