Prev: Mis-using DNS for solving WWW browser problems.
Next: Outside dns not changin
From: bod43 on 29 Mar 2010 08:37
On 29 Mar, 12:56, Poutnik <m...(a)privacy.net> wrote:
> In article <hopg9a$pt...(a)tioat.net>, katspianostudioXXX(a)Use-Author-
> Supplied-Address.invalid says...
>
>
>
> > When I start Firefox to a blank page, 4 more entries arise:
> > firefox.exe(3868) Kat(127.0.0.1) 2522 Kat(127.0.0.1) 2521 TCP Established
> > firefox.exe(3868) Kat(127.0.0.1) 2523 Kat(127.0.0.1) 2524 TCP Established
> > firefox.exe(3868) Kat(127.0.0.1) 2521 Kat(127.0.0.1) 2522 TCP Established
> > firefox.exe(3868) Kat(127.0.0.1) 2524 Kat(127.0.0.1) 2523 TCP Established
>
> > At the same time, Comodo tells me only about ports 2523 & 2521:
> > TCP Listening:2523
> > TCP Listening:2521
>
> > Does this help to figure out what is going on with those two ports opened
> > up by Firefox?
>
> did not I explain it before ?
>
> FF created loopback TCP connection No 1
> from port 2522 to port 2521  of listening FF.
> FF created loopback TCP connection No 2
> from port 2524 to port 2523  of listening FF.
> FF is still loopback listening on portes 2521, 2523.
>
> Said by other words, FF is connecting to itself.

I agree with this interpretation.

This form of inter process communication will be
portable across all platforms and would be a good
design choice for Firefox.

I guess that in this case it's inter-thread communications.
Thread being a 'lightweight process'.

Nothing spooky anyway.
From: za kAT on 29 Mar 2010 10:58
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 05:18:55 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Kat Rabun wrote:
>
>> ...
>> Does this help to figure out what is going on with those two ports opened
>> up by Firefox?
>
> Since this all focuses on Firefox, wouldn't asking in a newsgroup with a
> community focused on that product produce better responses? If your NNTP
> server doesn't carry the mozilla.* newsgroups, you can connect your NNTP
> client to news.mozilla.org. There are Firefox groups there. If the users
> there don't know, someone might know how to contact the Mozilla development
> group to inquire about these ghost connects.

Sure it would but John Stubbings aka Kat Rabun needs his Usenet fix
here. Luv and freindhshit, you know.

We support Bear Bottoms.
--
zakAT(a)pooh.the.cat - www.zakATsKopterChat.com
From: Kat Rabun on 29 Mar 2010 10:59
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 05:18:55 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:

> Kat Rabun wrote:
>
>> ...
>> Does this help to figure out what is going on with those two ports opened
>> up by Firefox?
>
> Since this all focuses on Firefox, wouldn't asking in a newsgroup with a
> community focused on that product produce better responses? If your NNTP
> server doesn't carry the mozilla.* newsgroups, you can connect your NNTP
> client to news.mozilla.org. There are Firefox groups there. If the users
> there don't know, someone might know how to contact the Mozilla development
> group to inquire about these ghost connects.

You're no help.

*SHADDUP*

Respectfully,

John Stubbings
From: Slarty on 29 Mar 2010 11:49
On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 21:13:57 +0000 (UTC), bitte wrote:

> Don't see any manual, is there one? Why is it any better than process
> manager?

I can't see the need for one, so I've not looked. If you don't understand
what you see, perhaps you'd better call in a friend or whatever who can
help you understand.

I like the ability this little application gives you to trace both ends of
the connection to the sources, in real time, and then terminate the
connection if required. Try highlighting the suspect process and then right
clicking to see what I mean. There's nothing wrong at all with Process
Explorer which I have set up in place of Windows own Task Manager, take a
look in the Process Explorer Help file. It's just a case of using the best
tool for a particular job.

If you take a note of the remote IP and if you are using a router which
enables you to set up rules based on IPs to prevent outgoing as well as
incoming connection requests, you should be better able to see what is
happening. Especially if something stops working! Blocking via a Router, if
that is what you want, is far more reliable than using any software
personal 'firewall' - that includes Comodo.

Cheers,

Roy
From: Slarty on 29 Mar 2010 12:00
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 06:10:51 +0000 (UTC), Kat Rabun wrote:

[Massive snippage]

> At the same time, Comodo tells me only about ports 2523 & 2521:
> TCP Listening:2523
> TCP Listening:2521
>
> Does this help to figure out what is going on with those two ports opened
> up by Firefox?

I see nothing like this on any copy or version of Firefox that I've used on
any of several PCs. As has been suggested, ask on a Mozilla forum.

I'd be more inclined to remove all traces of the curent version of Firefox,
perhaps using Revo Uninstaller to get rid of everything, and then staring
with a fresh installation using a known clean installer from Mozilla. A
bloody nuisance as you'll lose everything, but if you're that unhappy with
the situation....

Cheers,

Roy
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Mis-using DNS for solving WWW browser problems.
Next: Outside dns not changin