
omas.jakobsson at corren
Aug 17, 2001, 3:30 AM
Post #2 of 2
(552 views)
Permalink
|
Hi I have the same problem, but instead of closing the ports, you might take extra care in securing your machine with the latest patches/and/or restrivt anonymous access to the machine by saving these lines in a .reg file and run it (WinNT4.0): To set the system to “Do not allow enumeration of SAM accounts and names” ---------------------------copy below line------------------------------- REGEDIT4 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa] "RestrictAnonymous"=dword:00000001 ---------------------------copy above line------------------------------- In windows 200 it´s a bit more to choose from: To set the system to “Do not allow enumeration of SAM accounts and names” ---------------------------copy below line------------------------------- Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa] "restrictanonymous"=dword:00000001 ---------------------------copy above line------------------------------- To set the system to “No access without explicit anonymous permissions” ---------------------------copy below line------------------------------- Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Lsa] "restrictanonymous"=dword:00000002 ---------------------------copy above line------------------------------- I haven´t tried this yet, it might brake something, if it does, just set the above values to zero instead of one or two. Good luck! Regards. /Omas Jakobsson > Vinod K K skrev: > > hello, > i ran the nessus tool on a microsoft proxy server & i got a result > stating that the port 139/TCP is open.a vulnerability was detected at > port NETBIOS-ssn.the solution suggested by the tool was to filter the > port 137 to 139. > but in my case i'm not in a position to follow that. > is there any alternative to this? so that i can close the hole > without disturbing any of the settings. > the proxy server i've mentioned above is frequent access by a large > number of hosts in the network. > thanks > vinod
|