|
|||||||||||
|
Re: Logs: Many hits with source port of 80
From: Kevin Bowman <kevin.bowman(at)garmin.com>
Date: Mon Dec 16 2002 - 13:54:03 EST If I'm correct, you should probably see a couple other packets - perhaps an ICMP echo and a port 53 hit with source of port 53. I have also seen destinations of 47804 and 60750. The proximity feature will fire these packets if either you send the load balancer a packet, or someone behind their load balancer pays you a visit - you might look for inbound packets from their networks as well as outbound to them. http://www.radware.com/content/products/link.asp
Hope this helps.
Byrne Ghavalas wrote:
>>I have seen similar hits for the past three months. >> >>Mine are UDP. Are you sure yours are TCP? All mine had destination > > port > >>37852. All hits have been from the same two hosts, and are fairly >>infrequent. >> >>2002-12-11 14:56:03 63.211.17.228 myhost Udp 80 37852 >>2002-12-11 14:56:06 64.152.70.68 myhost Udp 80 37852 >>2002-12-11 14:56:08 63.211.17.228 myhost Udp 80 37852 >>2002-12-11 14:56:11 64.152.70.68 myhost Udp 80 37852 >>2002-12-11 15:04:20 64.152.70.68 myhost Udp 80 37852 >>2002-12-11 15:04:25 64.152.70.68 myhost Udp 80 37852 >> >>The reverse DNS for 64.152.70.68 is proximitycheck2.allmusic.com, but >>proximitycheck2.allmusic.com doesn't resolve to anything. >>The reverse DNS for 63.211.17.228 is proximitycheck1.allmusic.com, but >>proximitycheck1.allmusic.com doesn't resolve to anything. >> >>These always appear after a user visits www.allmusic.com and I believe > > the > >>packets are benign but annoying load balancing probes. Your probes may >>possibly have similar origins - try correlating the probes with web > > logs if > >>you have them. >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Byrne Ghavalas [mailto:security@nscs.uk.com] >>Sent: Friday, December 13, 2002 5:06 AM >>To: incidents@securityfocus.com >>Subject: Logs: Many hits with source port of 80 >> >> >>Hi All, >> >>Has anyone else noticed a high number of hits in their security logs, >>where the source port is set to tcp 80 and the destination port is > > some > >>high tcp port? I have noticed that these events seem to be getting > > more > >>numerous than the NetBios scans ;-) >> >>For example: >>2002-12-13 09:08:04 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:07:04 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:06:05 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:05:04 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:04:04 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:03:05 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:02:04 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:01:28 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:01:10 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:01:01 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:00:57 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:00:55 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:00:54 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >>2002-12-13 09:00:54 194.78.225.36:80 XX.XX.XX.XX:29439 >> >>It appears to be some kind of automated scan as the time of each entry >>appears to follow a pattern. >> >>Byrne Ghavalas >> >> >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ------ > >>This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service. >>For more information on this free incident handling, management >>and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com >> >> >> > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided by the SecurityFocus ARIS analyzer service. For more information on this free incident handling, management and tracking system please see: http://aris.securityfocus.com Received on Mon Dec 16 14:15:49 2002 This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Aug 23 2006 - 14:01:54 EDT |
||||||||||
|
|||||||||||