«

I use XP+SP1. I am in the UK and I am connected to NTL broadband.

I am almost certain that I used to have no proxy sevrer set in IE6 >
Tools > Internet Options > Connections > Lan Settings.

However I now see that the Use Proxy Server box is ticked and the IP
address entered is the loopback address 127.0.0.1 on port 81.

Some web sites do not like this and they have problems.

I also have Zome Alarm 4.5 and also the antivirus Avast (version 4.5
home edition). Perhaps one of these two applications change the LAN
Settings?

I also use Firefox and Opera as browsers. Their own settings seem
unchanged and do not refer to a proxy server but when I try to go to
the problem web pages (eg http://www.firstdirect.com/) then they
return a message protesting about proxy servers.

How can I get around this?

Zak wrote:
> I use XP+SP1. I am in the UK and I am connected to NTL broadband.

My personal opinion: update to SP2, use the SP2 firewall and deinstall
ZoneAlarm. (No further comment necessary.)

> I am almost certain that I used to have no proxy sevrer set in IE6 >
> Tools > Internet Options > Connections > Lan Settings.
>
> However I now see that the Use Proxy Server box is ticked and the IP
> address entered is the loopback address 127.0.0.1 on port 81.

To check: open a command prompt. Type "netstat -a -o -p tcp" to list
your tcp connections and open ports. Look for the line with the local
address listening to port 81. The last column is the process id of the
process listening on that port. Remember the PID (eg. 1234).

Type

tasklist /fi "pid eq 1234" /v

(with the double quotes) to see the name of the process image. Replace
the /v with /svc to get service information if it is a running service.

If you don't recognize the name of the executable, search the drive for
it or look into the directories of ZoneAlarm to see if you can find it
there.

> Some web sites do not like this and they have problems.

A web site does not know about this. The only possible problems is some
information that it filtered out, e.g. cookies.

> I also have Zome Alarm 4.5 and also the antivirus Avast (version 4.5
> home edition). Perhaps one of these two applications change the LAN
> Settings?

Likely.

> I also use Firefox and Opera as browsers. Their own settings seem
> unchanged and do not refer to a proxy server but when I try to go to
> the problem web pages (eg http://www.firstdirect.com/) then they
> return a message protesting about proxy servers.

What's the exact message?

> How can I get around this?

The easiest way probably would be to deinstall ZoneAlarm (if it is ZA)
and update to SP2, and use its firewall which is more stable and runs
much faster. Otherwise, (if it is ZA) you have to properly configure ZA
not to filter out whatever it is filtering out which probably means to
deactivate its privacy protection or whitelist the sites that have
problems with it. ZA support or help pages should be extensive about
how to do this.

Gerald

"Gerald Vogt" <> wrote in message
news:420eb553$0$985$...
> Zak wrote:
>> I use XP+SP1. I am in the UK and I am connected to NTL broadband.
>
> My personal opinion: update to SP2, use the SP2 firewall and deinstall
> ZoneAlarm. (No further comment necessary.)

Gee, most people are recommending the exact opposite...... Do you work for
Microsoft???

To the OP: I also run ZoneAlarm and Avast and have no such problem, perhaps
it was something else that set the proxy settings? I'm not sure why Gerald
feels WinXP-SP2 firewall is more stable and better than ZA (or other third
party firewalls), seems almost all other software 'experts' say not to use
the Windows firewall - I certainly noticed more 'intrusions' using only the
Windows firewall, problems that were stopped by switching to ZA and turning
the Windows firewall off!!

>
>> I am almost certain that I used to have no proxy sevrer set in IE6 >
>> Tools > Internet Options > Connections > Lan Settings.
>>
>> However I now see that the Use Proxy Server box is ticked and the IP
>> address entered is the loopback address 127.0.0.1 on port 81.
>
> To check: open a command prompt. Type "netstat -a -o -p tcp" to list your
> tcp connections and open ports. Look for the line with the local address
> listening to port 81. The last column is the process id of the process
> listening on that port. Remember the PID (eg. 1234).
>
> Type
>
> tasklist /fi "pid eq 1234" /v
>
> (with the double quotes) to see the name of the process image. Replace the
> /v with /svc to get service information if it is a running service.
>
> If you don't recognize the name of the executable, search the drive for it
> or look into the directories of ZoneAlarm to see if you can find it there.
>
>> Some web sites do not like this and they have problems.
>
> A web site does not know about this. The only possible problems is some
> information that it filtered out, e.g. cookies.
>
>> I also have Zome Alarm 4.5 and also the antivirus Avast (version 4.5 home
>> edition). Perhaps one of these two applications change the LAN Settings?
>
> Likely.
>
>> I also use Firefox and Opera as browsers. Their own settings seem
>> unchanged and do not refer to a proxy server but when I try to go to the
>> problem web pages (eg http://www.firstdirect.com/) then they return a
>> message protesting about proxy servers.
>
> What's the exact message?
>
>> How can I get around this?
>
> The easiest way probably would be to deinstall ZoneAlarm (if it is ZA) and
> update to SP2, and use its firewall which is more stable and runs much
> faster. Otherwise, (if it is ZA) you have to properly configure ZA not to
> filter out whatever it is filtering out which probably means to deactivate
> its privacy protection or whitelist the sites that have problems with it.
> ZA support or help pages should be extensive about how to do this.
>
> Gerald
>

Gerald Vogt skrev:

> My personal opinion: update to SP2, use the SP2 firewall and deinstall
> ZoneAlarm. (No further comment necessary.)

Uhu. ZA protects outgoing traffic from programs as well (you get a
notice about all new programs trying to talk to the net and can block
them). Windows FW only blocks incoming and server (listen) programs.

--
Lars-Erik - http://home.chello.no/~larse/ - ICQ 7297605
WinXP, Asus P4PE, 2.53 GHz, Asus V8420 (Ti4200), SB-Live!

Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
> Uhu. ZA protects outgoing traffic from programs as well (you get a
> notice about all new programs trying to talk to the net and can block
> them). Windows FW only blocks incoming and server (listen) programs.

What else do you need? Do you rely on the outgoing filtering? It is
extremely easy to circumvent the outgoing "filter" and there are many
examples how to do it. If you catch some Spyware on your computer it may
send data out and your PFW won't notice. (e.g. your browser is probably
enabled to send data out and any software running locally can use IE to
send data out...) I would not call this "protection": most of the
software you use that wants to send data out you will enable anyway,
because it needs the internet (e-mail, browser, etc.) while that
software that you really want to block out (spyware etc.) can easily
circumvent it. There is no real benefit in that.

And if you rely on it, i.e. you say "I've installed that PFW thus nobody
can spy me out. I can install any program on my computer I want. I am
safe anyway." There are many examples posted in various newsgroups with
people that installed virus scanner, PFW, spyware scanner and more to be
safe and still "catched" something because they thought with all that
security software nothing would happen. They just don't get it that the
biggest security problem they have is themselves.

So there is group A that downloads the craziest stuff from the weirdest
places. Those people live dangerous and no PFW or other security
software can help them in the end. Just think about all those pop-ups of
the PFW that ask you whether you want to allow this or that. Do you
always know the correct answer?

And group B does not download things. They just want browse their local
newspaper, send some e-mails, use some word processor. They are careful
and they don't open spam and in particular don't open documents
promising anything with strange attachments. Someone told them and they
know that and they are careful. For them, a PFW may be nice as it tells
them when Word tries to connect to the microsoft server. But then, you
wanted Word and you want the clip art, so you allow it anyway. You don't
need a difficult pop-up question for that. No need here for an outgoing
filter, either.

So the outgoing filter does not work 100%. Either you rely on it and
play it dangerous and loose eventually (all those other things blocked
like the automatic update from some legal software giving you the false
impressions it that it works perfectly) or you don't rely on it and be
careful. But then, you don't rely on it anyway so why do you need it?
The SP2 FW is perfect as incoming filter and cannot be as easily turned
off as a PFW from some software running on your system. (Whatever you
can do on your system any software that you run can do as well, it just
"simulates" a couple of mouse clicks and before you can see it your PFW
is turned off from its tray icon). You don't even need the SP2 firewall
if you do not install strange software and shut down all those "nice"
services that Windows usually starts but that you never need or
configure them that they do not listen to the internet interface...

Gerald

Gerald Vogt skrev:

> What else do you need? Do you rely on the outgoing filtering? It is
> extremely easy to circumvent the outgoing "filter" and there are many

Have you tried the outgoing filters. Lots of programs try to connect
the net for no apparent reason (ms programs, cd/dvd burning software,
services, even word and excel). I like to have control (and stop) such
attemts. Why should my DVD-burning software talk to someone out there?

I use 3 different spy/adware cleaning enginges too, but that does NOT
stop all the programs talking to the net without asking first :-/

--
Lars-Erik - http://home.chello.no/~larse/ - ICQ 7297605
WinXP, Asus P4PE, 2.53 GHz, Asus V8420 (Ti4200), SB-Live!

In alt.comp.anti-virus, Gerald Vogt wrote:

> and any software running locally can use IE to send data out...)

Not on my computer..

Why are you trying to discourage newbies from using a firewall?

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Lars-Erik Østerud wrote:
> I use 3 different spy/adware cleaning enginges too, but that does NOT
> stop all the programs talking to the net without asking first :-/

Again: it is easy to circumvent. Your PFW does not stop _all_ programs
talking to the net without asking first. It does stop those which kindly
agree to be cooperative and do simply use the windows IP stack for
communication. If the program does use other ways of communication (e.g.
your web browser) your PFW won't block nor notify because I assume that
your PFW is configured to allow outgoing web browser traffic. Programs
can also simply deactivate the PFW for a while and send out data anyway.

Again: There is no way to filter _all_ outgoing traffic on the computer
you are running. The only thing to do that would be some external device.

Gerald

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
> In alt.comp.anti-virus, Gerald Vogt wrote:
>> and any software running locally can use IE to send data out...)
>
> Not on my computer..

You are running Windows? You have Internet Explorer. We were talking
about Windows? And even then, it does even have to be IE but just a web
browser would do, too.

> Why are you trying to discourage newbies from using a firewall?

I did not say that. Where did I say not to use a firewall? I told them
that the SP2 firewall is very good, does not mess with the system as
other PFW do, does not pretend to do things it cannot do without telling
you properly what it actually can do. It does not lead people to believe
that they are perfectly safe only by installing some software.

Gerald

In alt.comp.anti-virus, Gerald Vogt wrote:
> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>
>> In alt.comp.anti-virus, Gerald Vogt wrote:
>>
>>> and any software running locally can use IE to send data
>>> out...)
>>
>> Not on my computer..
>
> You are running Windows? You have Internet Explorer. We were
> talking about Windows?

Yes, yes, and yes.

> And even then, it does even have to be IE but just a web browser
> would do, too.

I agree with that. It does even have to be IE.

>> Why are you trying to discourage newbies from using a firewall?
>
> I did not say that. Where did I say not to use a firewall? I told
> them that the SP2 firewall is very good,

...until you can get a far better one installed.

> does not mess with the system as other PFW do, does not pretend to
> do things it cannot do without telling you properly what it
> actually can do. It does not lead people to believe that they are
> perfectly safe only by installing some software.

But.. but.. having no outbound firewall is not a good idea! A
third-party firewall is better than *nothing*.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.