What is Port 9835 used for?

On 1/18/2012 6:30 PM, cameo wrote:
> On 1/18/2012 1:14 PM, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:
>> In the future, I have an online port reference that I keep updated
>> pretty regularly.
>>
>> http://thedatalist.com/portlist/lookup.php
>>
>> No ads, no cookies, just information.
>
> Thanks, I've saved it.
> BTW, I checked my router again and I've noticed that it had the remote
> administration enabled, so theoretically somebody, who knew the admin
> password, could have opened that port. I hope I am wrong because I have
> not noticed any suspicious activity yet. Besides, I also have a windows
> firewall. In any case, I now shot my router tight.
>

That's hardly cause to shoot a router!
(Some time ago, I totally disabled remote Admin.)

On 1/19/2012 2:49 PM, charlie wrote:
> That's hardly cause to shoot a router!

I don't get this.

> (Some time ago, I totally disabled remote Admin.)

I thought I had it disabled, so I bever really bothered to check it.
It's hard to miss in this router's busy UI.

On 1/19/2012, cameo posted:
> On 1/19/2012 2:49 PM, charlie wrote:
>> That's hardly cause to shoot a router!

> I don't get this.

Charlie neglected to quote your post. He was referring to a typo you
made there. You typed

"In any case, I now shot my router tight"

instead of "shut".

I don't know if he was just teasing or being mean; let's assume the
first :-)

Still, it would have been kinder if he had quoted what he was referring
to.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 1/20/2012 12:02 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
> On 1/19/2012, cameo posted:
>> On 1/19/2012 2:49 PM, charlie wrote:
>>> That's hardly cause to shoot a router!
>
>> I don't get this.
>
> Charlie neglected to quote your post. He was referring to a typo you
> made there. You typed
>
> "In any case, I now shot my router tight"
>
> instead of "shut".
>
> I don't know if he was just teasing or being mean; let's assume the
> first :-)
>
> Still, it would have been kinder if he had quoted what he was referring to.

Oh, thanks for explaining it. Too bad I didn't get it right away
because now I find Charlie's reply quite funny and clever. But I do
admit that occasionally, especially when I am in a hurry, I mix up words
that sound the same when pronounced. Shut and shot is one of those
pairs. Brake and break is another. It is probably because English is not
my native language. On the other hand I seldom, if ever, mix up "its"
with "it's" or "there" with "their." So it's not all bad. ;-)

On 1/20/2012, cameo posted:
> On 1/20/2012 12:02 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
>> On 1/19/2012, cameo posted:
>>> On 1/19/2012 2:49 PM, charlie wrote:
>>>> That's hardly cause to shoot a router!
>>
>>> I don't get this.
>>
>> Charlie neglected to quote your post. He was referring to a typo you
>> made there. You typed
>>
>> "In any case, I now shot my router tight"
>>
>> instead of "shut".
>>
>> I don't know if he was just teasing or being mean; let's assume the
>> first :-)
>>
>> Still, it would have been kinder if he had quoted what he was referring to.

> Oh, thanks for explaining it. Too bad I didn't get it right away because
> now I find Charlie's reply quite funny and clever. But I do admit that
> occasionally, especially when I am in a hurry, I mix up words that sound the
> same when pronounced. Shut and shot is one of those pairs. Brake and break is
> another. It is probably because English is not my native language.

Plenty of native speakers make the same errors, and so do spell
checkers.

> On the
> other hand I seldom, if ever, mix up "its" with "it's" or "there" with
> "their." So it's not all bad. ;-)

I occasionally make those errors (and even "they're"), and I am a
native speaker *and* a college graduate :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 1/20/2012 3:32 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
> On 1/20/2012, cameo posted:
>> On 1/20/2012 12:02 PM, Gene E. Bloch wrote:
>>> On 1/19/2012, cameo posted:
>>>> On 1/19/2012 2:49 PM, charlie wrote:
>>>>> That's hardly cause to shoot a router!
>>>
>>>> I don't get this.
>>>
>>> Charlie neglected to quote your post. He was referring to a typo you
>>> made there. You typed
>>>
>>> "In any case, I now shot my router tight"
>>>
>>> instead of "shut".
>>>
>>> I don't know if he was just teasing or being mean; let's assume the
>>> first :-)
>>>
>>> Still, it would have been kinder if he had quoted what he was
>>> referring to.
>
>> Oh, thanks for explaining it. Too bad I didn't get it right away
>> because now I find Charlie's reply quite funny and clever. But I do
>> admit that occasionally, especially when I am in a hurry, I mix up
>> words that sound the same when pronounced. Shut and shot is one of
>> those pairs. Brake and break is another. It is probably because
>> English is not my native language.
>
> Plenty of native speakers make the same errors, and so do spell checkers.
>
>> On the other hand I seldom, if ever, mix up "its" with "it's" or
>> "there" with "their." So it's not all bad. ;-)
>
> I occasionally make those errors (and even "they're"), and I am a native
> speaker *and* a college graduate :-)
>

Usually, Thunderbird does include the message. I don't know why it
didn't. I likely didn't do something exactly right.

The reply was (to me anyway) obviously a tongue in cheek remark.

As to port usage, etc., and a particular port - - it's not uncommon to
have software use uncommon ports. The problem is to set things so that
"normal usage" occurs, and unusual usage gets flagged for attention, or
stopped.

My routers and P/Cs are setup such that known programs are usually
allowed access, and unknown ones get flagged. The biggest problems I've
had with this have to do with major content providers and all the
various add schemes. It's a never ending game for them to get the adds
through anyway. Occasionally, getting around port blockage by my IP has
been an issue. For an extra $100 a month or so, the IP will gladly
unblock all the ports, and incidentally include a fixed IP address
assignment.

On 1/21/2012, charlie posted:
> Usually, Thunderbird does include the message. I don't know why it didn't. I
> likely didn't do something exactly right.

Please feel free to blame Thunderbird :-)

But also look around to find out what you might have done...

> The reply was (to me anyway) obviously a tongue in cheek remark.

I really thought that, that's why I said,

"I don't know if he was just teasing or being mean; let's assume the
first :-)"

Sorry if that was not so clear.

Besides, cameo had no trouble with it, it was only me...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

In article <KpDSq.508881$>, charlie
<> said...

http://www.nirsoft.net/utils/cports.html

Will tell you who has what open.