blocked for Script Name: /modules.php

eagleeye1000 · New Member Joined: Nov 04, 2007 Posts: 12

hi all,

haven't come ascross this problem before. One of our regular members got a nuke sentinel ban for this:

Date & Time: 2008-07-28 00:54:29 CEST GMT +0200
Blocked IP: *****
User ID: Anonymous (1)
Reason: Abuse-Filter
--------------------
Referer: none
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.16) Gecko/20080702 Firefox/2.0.0.16
HTTP Host:

Only registered users can see links on this board!
Get registered or login to the forums!

Script Name: /modules.php
Query String: name=Forumshttp://www.*****.com/modules.php?name=Forums
Get String: name=Forumshttp://www.*****.com/modules.php?name=Forums
Post String: Not Available
Forwarded For: none
Client IP: none
Remote Address: *****
Remote Port: 1074
Request Method: GET
--------------------
Who-Is for IP

Any idea what could have caused this and how I can prevent this in the future. (have removed the ip for **** and our webpage name)

running the latest nukesentinel.

Always kind of carefull on displaying our site and the nuke sentinel version of it. That's why I also never display that image ( we caught blalbabl shamefull hackers). I think it only encourages the hackers to make an attempt. And if you display your version they know exactly which flaws in that they can abuse right? Quit shocking to see we have 871 blocked already Shocked

TNX (just not sure what caused this ban, any help would be appreciated)

montego · Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2008 5:52 am

Well, its the inner "http://" that caused the ban, but not sure just where that odd Query string would be coming from. Any way to find out just what that user had attempted to do and from what page?

BTW, the latest 2.6.x branch of NukeSentinel no longer shows the version number... Wink

eagleeye1000 · New Member Joined: Nov 04, 2007 Posts: 12

tnx montego

as far as I know he just tried to click a forum link from the main page. Never heard of anybody before that had that, that's why it's so strange.

Tnx for the tip on the image version, I noticed indeed the version number is off now. Much better i think Very Happy