Comments on: Apple Time Capsule http://www.hrgeeks.com/2008/03/17/apple-time-capsule/ Hampton Roads Geek community Tue, 22 Nov 2011 09:39:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3 By: Ethan http://www.hrgeeks.com/2008/03/17/apple-time-capsule/comment-page-1/#comment-30 Ethan Thu, 20 Mar 2008 01:29:35 +0000 http://www.hrgeeks.com/2008/03/17/apple-time-capsule/#comment-30 Don't forget to read the Wired article about Apple: http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-04/bz_apple Don’t forget to read the Wired article about Apple:

http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-04/bz_apple

]]> By: adam http://www.hrgeeks.com/2008/03/17/apple-time-capsule/comment-page-1/#comment-25 adam Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:20:51 +0000 http://www.hrgeeks.com/2008/03/17/apple-time-capsule/#comment-25 Did you have the 'Share disks over Ethernet WAN port' option checked by any chance? An nmap of mine shows: <code> PORT STATE SERVICE 25/tcp filtered smtp 80/tcp filtered http 135/tcp filtered msrpc 136/tcp filtered profile 137/tcp filtered netbios-ns 138/tcp filtered netbios-dgm 139/tcp filtered netbios-ssn 445/tcp filtered microsoft-ds 593/tcp filtered http-rpc-epmap 1433/tcp filtered ms-sql-s </code> I assume that most of those are uPNP or NAT or something, as I can't imagine what it could be using on half the ports... They are inaccessible from the WAN, as well as from within. I wonder if Apple just didn't feel like changing the binding of the ports to not be */0.0.0.0, and that's why they show up on both interfaces. The box runs OSX, doesn't it? Did you have the ‘Share disks over Ethernet WAN port’ option checked by any chance?
An nmap of mine shows:

PORT STATE SERVICE
25/tcp filtered smtp
80/tcp filtered http
135/tcp filtered msrpc
136/tcp filtered profile
137/tcp filtered netbios-ns
138/tcp filtered netbios-dgm
139/tcp filtered netbios-ssn
445/tcp filtered microsoft-ds
593/tcp filtered http-rpc-epmap
1433/tcp filtered ms-sql-s

I assume that most of those are uPNP or NAT or something, as I can’t imagine what it could be using on half the ports…
They are inaccessible from the WAN, as well as from within. I wonder if Apple just didn’t feel like changing the binding of the ports to not be */0.0.0.0, and that’s why they show up on both interfaces. The box runs OSX, doesn’t it?

]]> By: Chris http://www.hrgeeks.com/2008/03/17/apple-time-capsule/comment-page-1/#comment-24 Chris Mon, 17 Mar 2008 11:44:34 +0000 http://www.hrgeeks.com/2008/03/17/apple-time-capsule/#comment-24 It's great until you try to forward a range of ports....that's when the whole thing comes crashing down. Hopefully Apple will provide a firmware update in the not to distant future. Also I'd be interested in hearing what people think of it's security. I purchased a 500GB one, and the security concerns me. Being a router AND a storage device for all my personal information is a little scary. The fact that nmap reports the samba related ports in a quick scan seems unusual. Granted they are reported as "filtered" but still.....why would a router provide that information on the WAN? It’s great until you try to forward a range of ports….that’s when the whole thing comes crashing down. Hopefully Apple will provide a firmware update in the not to distant future.

Also I’d be interested in hearing what people think of it’s security. I purchased a 500GB one, and the security concerns me. Being a router AND a storage device for all my personal information is a little scary. The fact that nmap reports the samba related ports in a quick scan seems unusual. Granted they are reported as “filtered” but still…..why would a router provide that information on the WAN?

]]>