Thorizdin_LotD
-
Posts
314 -
Joined
-
Arcana is correct in the assessment here, though I'd disagree on why. More than likely this was the web site behaving in a perfectly normal fashion since browsers by rule open multiple connections to web servers (un tweaked browser settings are usually 8 concurrent, but this often changed http://goo.gl/KpNky). I'd ask what OS, browser, and firewall are you using before going forward, but Arcana is 100% correct in that there is no chance that an actual port scanner would come from 443 (which the HTTPS server is bound to) and scan ports about 1024 (these are the privileged ports in the TCP/IP world) in sets of 4 or so. If anyone wants a more indepth look at how this works downloard Wireshark (its free/OSS) http://www.wireshark.org/ and take a look at some of the videos here: http://www.securitytube.net/video/12
Quote:Originally Posted by Arcanaville
99.999% this is a false positive. It happens all the time. The log says that the host in question is port scanning your system *from* port 443 (the SSL port) *to* a *small* number of consecutive high ports on your system around 16288.
More likely your own computer was making connections *to* NCsoft from those source ports to port 443 (basically, an HTTPS connection) and for some reason NCSoft's website didn't process those connections correctly or quickly enough. After your workstation closed those ports and opened new ones, at some point NCSoft's web server responded to your computer on those ports not realizing your computer had already closed them. Your firewall saw your computer close those ports so it no longer tracked connections on them. Then it saw packets coming from the web server heading for those ports, those packets were not, as far as it knew, part of existing connections, and it saw a bunch of them heading to a range of consecutive ports in a short time window. So it triggered its port scan IDS signature.
However, the odds of NCSoft sending a port scan *from* port 443 is fairly low, and more significantly no one who port scans would only scan a few ports in the 16000's - that's a worthless scan: nothing runs there generally.
You see this most often when the target server (in this case the web server) is highly loaded or overloaded, or the network connections between client and server are lossy and dropping or misrouting packets, also due to network congestion. You will see, as you mention, bursts of activity like this and it will often trip port scan signatures in many firewalls. -
With the upcoming F2P release I figured I'd check back in and see what's going on with CoX. Are there any league tournaments running still? SC seems fairly active on Freedom still, but I see a lot of the old issue threads are still around...
I'd appreciate any opinions. -
Considering taking some of my Stalkers out, is this still broken in PvP?
-
[ QUOTE ]
i also want a tanker with a ranged automatic weapon.
[/ QUOTE ]
"All of you are dead!" -
CTF (NPC) and control points would be awesome in this game.
-
Perhaps I wasn't clear, I'm keeping my primary account active until and unless I'm finding another game so compelling I don't have time to play this one. This has been my plan since before any of the details on I12 started leaking out.
Now, if you really like the idea of paying for something you don't actually use I can rent you a room that you don't have access to, but you can't ever break the lease because that makes you a quitter. -
I've shut down my second account here, but I'll keep the primary one active unless AoC really sucks me in.
-
Demo kicks [censored] in a decent group
Of course, so do PoM's... -
The ice patches would be interesting....
-
Can I bring my Trojans?
-
[ QUOTE ]
I am reminded of my history professor saying that one of the biggest problems of democracy is that a 51% majority can vote to put the other 49% to death.
[/ QUOTE ]
Your history professor was an idiot then. Most, if not all, modern democracies are in fact dominated by motivated minorities. -
Congratulations!
-
[ QUOTE ]
....In fact PvP was not even in the game until CoV was released.
[/ QUOTE ]
PvP was introduced in I4. The rest of of your "facts" are also incorrect. -
[ QUOTE ]
its lord recluse on the big screen/PA system that is lagging the zone down
[/ QUOTE ]
I wonder if power set proliferation might one day include a remote control... -
UncleBug?
-
pics or it didn't happen
-
This is a much more rational method of handling soft loading. I still feel some pain that there will be fewer Pool C recipes on the market, but at least this doesn't punish the wrong people. Perhaps the drop rates can be examined now that a source of artificial inflation will be removed.
One question, is there a method for the team leader to remove a player that DC'ed or logged off? If not, that might be nice QoL addition. -
[ QUOTE ]
the tpvpl article should have addressed how anyone who just brought vills into the league... most people i've spoken to, who just brought in vills, weren't too happy.
[/ QUOTE ]
We ran a Kin Corruptor for 90% of our matches and had a Therm in most. -
[ QUOTE ]
Its really funny sometimes when i recall people crying for end game content and crafting and suchfor so long. And when they get it the first thing they do is work on figuring out how to exploit the system instead of play within it.
[/ QUOTE ]
First, most TF's aren't end game content.
Second, if any content, end game or otherwise, is being played primarily for the reward by a significant number of players rather than for the content itself then where does the fault lie? -
[ QUOTE ]
This change will not affect the "masses of customers" at all. It will only affect the people who run task forces (which, believe it or not, a lot don't). Of those people, it will only affect them while they're running task forces, which for most people, is a very small percentage of their game time. Of that, it will only affect the people who are on teams in which players drop off, which a lot don't. Of that, it will only affect people who start task forces with the exact number of teammates needed to start the task force or who are on teams that have multiple people drop off. And even then, as pointed out, it will only cause failure if the team cannot defeat enemies spawned as if the missions were normal ones set to Tenacious instead of Heroic (which it's not unheard of for mid-to-high-level teams to run missions on Unyielding or Invincible). When all of these factors are accounted for, this is a small percentage of "the masses."
[/ QUOTE ]
Care to provide numbers to back up your assertions of limited harm? Even more important, care to provide numbers on the impact this has to correct the problem of farming pool C drops? I can answer the second, not damn much. The first is something that I can't answer definitively but I think the negative is going to far outweigh the positive. -
Wait...someone doesn't like waffles?? But, what about syrup?
-
[ QUOTE ]
The only people I've seen complain vehemently about the change have been right here in this thread and literally nowhere else.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wow, and the people you've spoken to personally represent a majority of the players....you must be popular. -
[ QUOTE ]
if it is an adittional account I think it should be available immediatly - as long as toons from both accounts don't show up in one match then I would call shennanigens.
[/ QUOTE ]
Makes sense to me... -
LotD's is correct
-
[ QUOTE ]
No it really doesn't. There's no sympathy for most of of you folks because you simply don't deserve any. All of the big complainers I've seen have forum reg dates no later than 2005. That means most of you have played through every other 2x weekend and most of the big events that's happened since release. If you couldn't see the writing on the wall it's because you shut your eyes to it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Odd how it's hard to choose to ignore something that's different than it has been in the past. In previous events the problems were lag and occasional server crashes, we've never been (IIRC) intentionally capped. My (mistaken) belief was they increased the capacity of their clusters specifically to address those problems. I'd like to have known in advance that intentional capping was going to occur especially without a queuing mechanism.
[ QUOTE ]
I saw the writing on the wall after the last 2x weekend. Freedom's been my home since before I1, but I wasn't going to play through that mess again. It just wasn't fun. So I decided to make all of my new toons on Justice. Most of my coalition has toons there as well now, and we're having a grand old time this weekend. All of you -- or near enough all to make no difference -- had this same opportunity. You could have paid to have your characters transferred to another server, or you could have done what I did and just started rolling new toons on a different one.
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, this is different than what happened in previous events...besides I don't like the PvE enough to want to "experience" it again so rolling new characters, leveling them, getting the accolades, and then IO'ing them out is no go. Are the developers going to replace my (small but valuable) cache of IO's or transfer my base? I don't think so, so to avoid their problem I have to pay money, convince my friends to move, lose everything in my base, or just leave it all behind and re-roll on one of the deserted servers. No thanks.
[ QUOTE ]
How some of you can expect sympathy now just boggles my mind.
[/ QUOTE ]
How you feel entitled to pass judgment on others boggles my mind.