Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Shields Up

Reply
Thread Tools

Shields Up

 
 
Clogwog
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2007
"DArnold" <(E-Mail Removed)> schreef in bericht
news:wa0bi.19117$(E-Mail Removed) hlink.net...
> Relish, talk to Rob Dog Bone in the thread. He'll listen to you. You can
> toss the dog a treat and listen to him bark.
>
> http://www.saltypawsbiscuits.com/
>


Oh yes, you will bark, Buhanepoo, no doubt about it!
http://www.angelfire.com/psy/doctorb...AndFeather.jpg
b.t.w. How did you manage to escape the loony bin again?
http://rjr10036.typepad.com/proceed_...ges/pope_2.jpg


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jordon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2007
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:

> I disconnected the router, and ran with the Clearwire.com box, Pretty
> sure it's a NAT.


I'm considering Clearwire. How do you like it?

--
Jordon
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Pennywise@DerryMaine.Gov
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-11-2007
Jordon <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
>
>> I disconnected the router, and ran with the Clearwire.com box, Pretty
>> sure it's a NAT.


>I'm considering Clearwire. How do you like it?


Not to well,
http://www.dslreports.com/stest?loc=97
Right now:
1158 / 188 (Kbps) D
(141.3 / 22.9 KB/sec) U

This morning it was 1400 D but I haven't used the internet that much
today.

The more I use it the slower it gets, last night before shutting down
I was getting 196 D.
..
Clearwire box and Lynksys router have been unplugged and reset
repeatedly - I've followed this for over a week, it just how it works.
I'm either being allocated MB's or so many people are sharing the
service it's killing my speed.

And the torrents are throttled.

I'm in this for two years as well - I wanted the airline ticket :}

Everything you do is recorded, or sent to their private internet for
whatever. (no suprise, but I think their monitoring my MegaBytes's)

Every tracert starts:

2 60 ms 33 ms 33 ms 66-233-176-1.kwk.clearwire-dns.net
3 51 ms 50 ms 50 ms 10.41.207.17
4 53 ms 58 ms 41 ms 64-13-49-2.war.clearwire-dns.net

10.41.207.17 - Google: RFC 1918

I will be talking to them tomorrow, I forgot to take my box today just
in case it's a problem (you can't access the box - so i put a router
between it and me).

But it's the my cheapest option - unlimited download or promised speed
clause might get me out of the contract if I need to.

The box: http://tinyurl.com/3coesy
--
So much illegal marijuana is being grown and seized in Mendocino
County that supervisors there are now calling for its legalization
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?sec...cal&id=5385477
 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter J Ross
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2007
In alt.usenet.kooks on Sat, 09 Jun 2007 22:15:07 -0400, Meat Plow
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Thought I'd run Shields Up at grc.com on this Kubuntu box. The IP is
> sitting in the DMZ (not behind the router firewall)
>
> "Your system has achieved a perfect "TruStealth" rating. Not a single
> packet — solicited or otherwise — was received from your system as a
> result of our security probing tests. Your system ignored and refused to
> reply to repeated Pings (ICMP Echo Requests). From the standpoint of the
> passing probes of any hacker, this machine does not exist on the Internet.
> Some questionable personal security systems expose their users by
> attempting to "counter-probe the prober", thus revealing themselves. But
> your system wisely remained silent in every way. Very nice."
>
> Run your Windoze box and post the results here, be honest.
>
> https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?rh1dkyd2


"Solicited TCP Packets: RECEIVED (FAILED) — As detailed in the port
report below, one or more of your system's ports actively responded to
our deliberate attempts to establish a connection. It is generally
possible to increase your system's security by hiding it from the
probes of potentially hostile hackers. Please see the details
presented by the specific port links below, as well as the various
resources on this site, and in our extremely helpful and active user
community."

Oh dear! my Linux box is less secure than Windows!

> heh

heh


--
PJR
FNVWE : DHoT : HoT 2006-01
COOSN-266-06-40792 : 10GS : UHoL
PSMHL&S 2003-12 & 2005-05 : 10GC&TR
 
Reply With Quote
 
hwf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2007
Peter J Ross <(E-Mail Removed)> pinched out a steaming pile
of<(E-Mail Removed)>:

>In alt.usenet.kooks on Sat, 09 Jun 2007 22:15:07 -0400, Meat Plow
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Thought I'd run Shields Up at grc.com on this Kubuntu box. The IP is
>> sitting in the DMZ (not behind the router firewall)
>>
>> "Your system has achieved a perfect "TruStealth" rating. Not a

single
>> packet — solicited or otherwise — was received from your system

as a
>> result of our security probing tests. Your system ignored and

refused to
>> reply to repeated Pings (ICMP Echo Requests). From the standpoint of

the
>> passing probes of any hacker, this machine does not exist on the

Internet.
>> Some questionable personal security systems expose their users by
>> attempting to "counter-probe the prober", thus revealing themselves.

But
>> your system wisely remained silent in every way. Very nice."
>>
>> Run your Windoze box and post the results here, be honest.
>>
>> https://www.grc.com/x/ne.dll?rh1dkyd2

>
>"Solicited TCP Packets: RECEIVED (FAILED) — As detailed in the port
>report below, one or more of your system's ports actively responded to
>our deliberate attempts to establish a connection. It is generally
>possible to increase your system's security by hiding it from the
>probes of potentially hostile hackers. Please see the details
>presented by the specific port links below, as well as the various
>resources on this site, and in our extremely helpful and active user
>community."
>
>Oh dear! my Linux box is less secure than Windows!
>
>> heh

>heh
>
>

Probably something to do with networked printer port...

Better stick to dolphins.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Jordon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2007
> Jordon wrote:
>> I'm considering Clearwire. How do you like it?


(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> Not to well,
> http://www.dslreports.com/stest?loc=97
> Right now:
> 1158 / 188 (Kbps) D
> (141.3 / 22.9 KB/sec) U
>
> This morning it was 1400 D but I haven't used the internet that much
> today.
>
> The more I use it the slower it gets, last night before shutting down
> I was getting 196 D.


They guy pushing it told me it was dedicated bandwidth. I guess that
means dedicated to everyone in my area.

Thanks for that.

--
Jordon
 
Reply With Quote
 
Aardvark
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2007
On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:33:57 +0000, Peter J Ross wrote:

> Oh dear! my Linux box is less secure than Windows!
>
>> heh


Looks like I'm open to attack too . Oh, well

--
Registered Linux User 413057.
Both Mandriva 2007.1 and Ubuntu 7.04
You can have it all. My empire of hurt.

Liverpool F.C.-more European Cups than all
the other English teams put together
 
Reply With Quote
 
Damian
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2007
Aardvark wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:33:57 +0000, Peter J Ross wrote:
>
>> Oh dear! my Linux box is less secure than Windows!
>>
>>> heh

>
> Looks like I'm open to attack too . Oh, well



/BANZAI/


 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter J Ross
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2007
In alt.usenet.kooks on 12 Jun 2007 14:20:44 GMT, hwf
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Peter J Ross <(E-Mail Removed)> pinched out a steaming pile
> of<(E-Mail Removed)>:
>
>>"Solicited TCP Packets: RECEIVED (FAILED) -- As detailed in the port
>>report below, one or more of your system's ports actively responded to
>>our deliberate attempts to establish a connection. It is generally
>>possible to increase your system's security by hiding it from the
>>probes of potentially hostile hackers. Please see the details
>>presented by the specific port links below, as well as the various
>>resources on this site, and in our extremely helpful and active user
>>community."
>>
>>Oh dear! my Linux box is less secure than Windows!

>
> Probably something to do with networked printer port...


*splorf*

I didn't think *anybody* would fall for that one. Congratulations on
being stupider than any XP or Vista users, Zenwolf.

Hint: some people open ports *deliberately*. 22 and 80 in my case.

--
PJR
FNVWE : DHoT : HoT 2006-01
COOSN-266-06-40792 : 10GS : UHoL
PSMHL&S 2003-12 & 2005-05 : 10GC&TR
 
Reply With Quote
 
Peter J Ross
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      06-12-2007
In alt.usenet.kooks on Tue, 12 Jun 2007 17:14:45 GMT, Aardvark
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 12:33:57 +0000, Peter J Ross wrote:
>
>> Oh dear! my Linux box is less secure than Windows!
>>
>>> heh

>
> Looks like I'm open to attack too . Oh, well


Maybe we should both upgrade from iptables to ZoneAlarm?

--
PJR
FNVWE : DHoT : HoT 2006-01
COOSN-266-06-40792 : 10GS : UHoL
PSMHL&S 2003-12 & 2005-05 : 10GC&TR
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which Avast 5.0 Shields are recommended Jack Computer Support 1 03-11-2010 08:25 AM
Zone Alarm & Shields Up JJ Computer Information 3 08-02-2006 12:08 AM
Shields Up Charlie Computer Support 1 04-29-2005 10:03 AM
Shields UP Lone Star NZ Computing 3 12-06-2004 11:13 PM
New Router & Shields Up test CB Computer Security 5 11-01-2003 06:18 PM



Advertisments