why seamonkey uses port 445?

User Help for Seamonkey and Mozilla Suite
Post Reply
lvm
Posts: 131
Joined: June 27th, 2005, 6:17 am

why seamonkey uses port 445?

Post by lvm »

Some time ago my samba logs started filling with

Code: Select all

[2018/04/15 09:42:44.773530,  0] ../source3/smbd/process.c:339(read_packet_remainder)
  read_fd_with_timeout failed for client 127.0.0.1 read error = NT_STATUS_END_OF_FILE.
Turns out, it is seamonkey 2.49.2

Code: Select all

smbd       4261     root   35u  IPv4 2612048      0t0  TCP localhost:445->localhost:44414 (ESTABLISHED)
seamonkey 32169      lvm   80u  IPv4 2616552      0t0  TCP localhost:44414->localhost:445 (ESTABLISHED)
Why and what is going on?
frg
Posts: 1361
Joined: December 15th, 2015, 1:20 pm

Re: why seamonkey uses port 445?

Post by frg »

Not here under Windows. Try about:networking . Not styled so probably only works with the classic theme.
Anonymosity
Posts: 8779
Joined: May 7th, 2007, 12:07 pm

Re: why seamonkey uses port 445?

Post by Anonymosity »

I looked up info on port 445.
Microsoft SMB Domain Server
Microsoft SMB Protocol and CIFS Protocol Overview

The Server Message Block (SMB) Protocol is a network file sharing protocol, and as implemented in Microsoft Windows is known as Microsoft SMB Protocol. The set of message packets that defines a particular version of the protocol is called a dialect. The Common Internet File System (CIFS) Protocol is a dialect of SMB. Both SMB and CIFS are also available on VMS, several versions of Unix, and other operating systems.
User avatar
Grumpus
Posts: 13246
Joined: October 19th, 2007, 4:23 am
Location: ... Da' Swamp

Re: why seamonkey uses port 445?

Post by Grumpus »

With most Linux OSs there's no need to allow 445. Blocking this port stops a whole lot of DoS attempts, tracking and other access attempts.
Here's what is in your /etc/services file:
#microsoft-ds 445/tcp # Microsoft Naked CIFS
#microsoft-ds 445/udp
Doesn't matter what you say, it's wrong for a toaster to walk around the house and talk to you
Post Reply