<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Web Browser Port Restrictions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michaeldaw.org/projects/web_browser_port_restrictions/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michaeldaw.org/projects/web_browser_port_restrictions</link>
	<description>Weekly humour</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 May 2009 20:09:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: david.kierznowski</title>
		<link>http://michaeldaw.org/projects/web_browser_port_restrictions/comment-page-1#comment-295</link>
		<dc:creator>david.kierznowski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Oct 2006 22:36:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaeldaw.org/projects/web_browser_port_restrictions/#comment-295</guid>
		<description>Daniel, I must take a look at Safari and Camino. Do you have a particular reason for picking sshd for your tests?

It is interesting to note in Firefox, that any service that terminates immediately after connecting (i.e. postgresql and sshd) can be used in port scanning. JSWebPing can be used to test this. Obviously sshd had to be setup on another port for this test.

It is definately an interesting area. 

Thanks pdp, your bi-directional project is rather interesting... I must have a chat to you about it, I have a few thoughts in that area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel, I must take a look at Safari and Camino. Do you have a particular reason for picking sshd for your tests?</p>
<p>It is interesting to note in Firefox, that any service that terminates immediately after connecting (i.e. postgresql and sshd) can be used in port scanning. JSWebPing can be used to test this. Obviously sshd had to be setup on another port for this test.</p>
<p>It is definately an interesting area. </p>
<p>Thanks pdp, your bi-directional project is rather interesting&#8230; I must have a chat to you about it, I have a few thoughts in that area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://michaeldaw.org/projects/web_browser_port_restrictions/comment-page-1#comment-269</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:37:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaeldaw.org/projects/web_browser_port_restrictions/#comment-269</guid>
		<description>Interesting, I&#039;ve also been looking at browser&#039;s interaction with the localhost for the research i&#039;ve been doing with Apple&#039;s Leopard.

Real world testing to see if browser will connect to port 22 on localhost:

IE 7.0.5450.4 (win2k3) refuses to connect
FF 1.5.0.6 refuses saying its restricted
Camino 1.0.3 refuses (built on FF framework, so expected same results as FF)
Safari 2.0.4 happily does a GET / HTTP/1.1 to the port

Interesting, so Safari here isn&#039;t following protocol and playing nicely. 

What happens when i try a non-standard port, hmmm 666 sounds good:

IE 7.0.5450.4 (win2k3) Tries to connect, but returns an error
FF 1.5.0.6 does a GET, but returns an error
Camino 1.0.3 happily does a GET / HTTP/1.1 to the port 
Safari 2.0.4 happily does a GET / HTTP/1.1 to the port</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting, I&#8217;ve also been looking at browser&#8217;s interaction with the localhost for the research i&#8217;ve been doing with Apple&#8217;s Leopard.</p>
<p>Real world testing to see if browser will connect to port 22 on localhost:</p>
<p>IE 7.0.5450.4 (win2k3) refuses to connect<br />
FF 1.5.0.6 refuses saying its restricted<br />
Camino 1.0.3 refuses (built on FF framework, so expected same results as FF)<br />
Safari 2.0.4 happily does a GET / HTTP/1.1 to the port</p>
<p>Interesting, so Safari here isn&#8217;t following protocol and playing nicely. </p>
<p>What happens when i try a non-standard port, hmmm 666 sounds good:</p>
<p>IE 7.0.5450.4 (win2k3) Tries to connect, but returns an error<br />
FF 1.5.0.6 does a GET, but returns an error<br />
Camino 1.0.3 happily does a GET / HTTP/1.1 to the port<br />
Safari 2.0.4 happily does a GET / HTTP/1.1 to the port</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pdp</title>
		<link>http://michaeldaw.org/projects/web_browser_port_restrictions/comment-page-1#comment-268</link>
		<dc:creator>pdp</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:16:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaeldaw.org/projects/web_browser_port_restrictions/#comment-268</guid>
		<description>very good and interesting reasearch!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>very good and interesting reasearch!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
