dunno if any1 has a way around this or not, but my work's ISP/firewall blocks access to any FTP's not using port 21. So basically I cant connect to any FTP that uses for eg port 69 or whatever. Ive tried HTTport, a TCP tunneler using socks4, but its just too dam slow. Any1 got any ideas? TIA :)

Why would anyone be running an FTP site on anything other than port 21?

warez :D

and with that self defeating post the thread was closed ...

Nick,
guess apart from the obvious reason just posted, you could put it on a different port to stop the general user accessing your FTP server, thus giving another layer of securty as the person needs to know the port number as well as the location and name and password for the server.

Thought as much. Appreciate your bluntness.

Some friendly advice: if you're doing this from work you are very likely to be in breach of your Internet acceptable use policy. Furthermore, you are engaging in illegal activity on work time, and I would guess that that's punishable by dismissal.

I'm not preaching, I'm just saying "be careful". Companies are, in general, making quite a few people redundant and are quite keen to sack people when they can. of course, where you work may be the exception :)

Nick.

yes and what Markus said :) thx for the advice but its not a problem here, not that I condone illegal warez of course Andrew :) Its mostly 'file' sharing between friends who dont like to run on port21 for those security reasons. *cough*

If you don't even know what you're doing (which you don't ;)) then don't play with stuff ;) FTP uses two (2) ports for a start (20 & 21), and port 69 is for UDP-based tftp which you shouldn't ever use over public Internet anyway. If you use passive FTP it works very differently. Clueless warez kids, gotta love 'em.

Steve.

I dont know what Im doing eh, how did u work that one out then? Of course the default ports are 20+21, a gibbon would know that. Granted port 69 was a bad example, but it doesnt stop u from using it in an FTP server. Im not a warez kiddie btw, but pls explain y u shouldnt use port69? thx ;) Passive FTP wouldnt solve my problem either.

This is going to turn into a TCP/IP stack knowledge pee'ing contest, isn't it? :)

Bonus points for the first person to point to the correct RFC.

;)

well seeing as im a clueless c*nt according to Cotton, im pointing somewhere wiv my middle finger :p

Because it runs over UDP as opposed to TCP, and there is no user login or validation within the TFTP protocol.

You can easily do what you're trying to do with a reverse ssh tunnel, binding one of your local ports to the remote FTP server. Shouldn't make any speed difference (you can choose to use compression or not), and all your data will be encrypted.

Steve.

I think I'll stay well out of this one.....

RFC 959

:)

Steve

http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc959/Overview.html

I didn't call you a ****, I called you a warez kid, which is what you pretty much admitted to. The FTP RFC is 959, you might perhaps learn more by reading it than making silly gestures towards me.

Steve.

I was joking ffs, sorry my sense of humour can jus seem insulting at times, although I dont like being called clueless when I'm not. Thx for your info though.
The http tunneler I use basically does what u were saying, but like I said because it uses hosted servers which any1 can use, its dead slow :( I am NOT a warezer! :)

It can use more than those ports... heard of PASV (passive) FTP conenctions ?

J.

Bioforger

Can you explain why anyone on an open forum should try and help you defeat your companies Security Policy ????

Jeff

:D

shunty

To lock, or not to lock, that is the question...

Chris

Lock or Muppett....:D

That's harsh on the muppets!

Lock it is.