Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computer Certification > A+ Certification > Re: XP Firewall sufficient by itself?

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: XP Firewall sufficient by itself?

 
 
Andrew
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-22-2005
Hi

ZoneAlarm will block incoming connections to particular ports AND pop
up an alert message whenever a program installed on your computer
attempts to contact the internet (which is a nice feature if malware
is installed on your computer).

The Windows XP firewall does NOT alert you whenever a program
installed on your computer attempts to contact the internet. If there
is malicious program hidden on your computer, Microsoft will allow it
to connect to the internet without warning you.

Why would Microsoft allow this?

Maybe because they want Windows XP to "phone home" behind your back...

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
returnoftheyeti@aol.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-23-2005
As far as software Firewalls go, XPs is about as good as they get. As
for Mcaffee or NIS (shudder) they may work, but at the expense of
useability features. Most Moms and Grandmas have no idea how to
configure them, they are system resource hogs and I have seen them
break more things than they ever fixed. NIS sucks

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-23-2005
I disagree. I absolutely refuse to use the WinXp firewall by itself. I
simply do not trust security to microsoft--period. As for Mcafee, and other
software firewalls being a resource hog and difficult for the average person
to configure--I disagree. There are only two software firewalls I will use
and I won't divulge what they are. Suffice it to say my defenses are
layered.


<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> As far as software Firewalls go, XPs is about as good as they get. As
> for Mcaffee or NIS (shudder) they may work, but at the expense of
> useability features. Most Moms and Grandmas have no idea how to
> configure them, they are system resource hogs and I have seen them
> break more things than they ever fixed. NIS sucks
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-23-2005
troll?

not hardly. The problem with divulging what firewall defenses I use--there
are more than just A+ techs who read these forums.....there are also those
nasty little script kiddies, and those who would only destroy that which is
not theirs--do you divulge what security you have installed at your home or
business? to give that away is to tell those who watch these forums what to
use against you....I have been hacked a time or two--but each time my
computer was attacked, I learned how to better defend it. I will tell you
this--I was motivated to learn about security--honey pots, DMZs, and other
little items, are all available on google. I also learned quickly to layer
my defenses after a little hacker attacked my computer with a denial of
service attack and caused such damage that it took nearly six weeks to undo
the damage that was done--and about $200 on new hardware on top of that--and
the miserable little server out of Texas tried to tell me their user didn't
attack me--BS, because I had his IP address logged and printed prior to my
machine doing the BSOD--which it did mind you every time I turned it on
until I finally figured out how to fix it----now I divulge nothing, except
one thing--Linux is your friend--especially when using it as a hardware
firewall and filter...

I merely responded to the post that WinXp firewall is sufficient by itself
and that software firewalls are difficult to configure and hog
resources--which they do not--at least in my opinion.
"smackedass" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:spake.6001$(E-Mail Removed) nk.net...
> There are only two software firewalls I will use
> > and I won't divulge what they are. Suffice it to say my defenses are
> > layered.

>
> Troll!
>
> Why offer up that you know something, if you won't divulge what it is?
> Unless it's something that you've invented, and have yet to market...
>
> sa
>
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
MF
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-23-2005
"Barry Watzman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Re: "> Why would Microsoft allow this?
>
> Microsoft was just trying to strike a balance between security and
> trouble-free "zero-configuration" installation and use by users with zero
> technical knowledge. I personally have always advised people not to
> install "Black Ice", "Zone Alarm" or any of the Norton firewalls,
> precisely because in the hands of most home users, they cause far more
> problems than they solve.
>
> In my view, Microsoft got it right.
>


This is a very good point. Except perhaps for the last sentence. If you
simply install XP SP2 on the computers of "most home users" they are going
to be unpleasantly surprised and annoyed by what happens to their favorite
sites and emails from their favorite sources. I don't think there is any
even moderately effective security solution that can be installed on most
home users' computers without you, the tech, configuring it.

Maybe I'm wrong, I only work with a few home users, but that's been my
impression.

Mike


 
Reply With Quote
 
returnoftheyeti@aol.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2005
You guys really need to learn about hardware firewalls. If your
software (MS, Zone Alarm, black Ice) firewall is breeched your system
is owned. Never mind the fact that you just opened an email infected
with the latest 0 day virus that just shut down, or opened ports in
your firewall (s) so now your system is Owned. Nat is not a firewall
either, but at leaste a port cant be opened in it by a virus.

I am not afraid of the script kiddies as the troll mentioned. I am
running a IPcop Firewall on a Celeron 500 MHZ. It protects my domain
controller, Exchange Server, and Web Site with no problems. I can
control outgoing and incoming traffic and have detailed logs. It
causes no preformance hits on any of my PCs.

Get a real firewall

 
Reply With Quote
 
me
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2005
why buy a hardware firewall when you can make one?

As for not being afraid of the script kiddies--I never said I was afraid of
them--quite the contrary--I find them to be very useful in showing me the
weakness of my defenses--know your enemy, otherwise you will be defeated by
them.


As for being a troll--that, I am not. I am simply someone offering my
opinions, ideas and suggestions just like the rest of the individuals who
post here.

Those who don't won't honest opinions shouldn't ask for them.

<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> You guys really need to learn about hardware firewalls. If your
> software (MS, Zone Alarm, black Ice) firewall is breeched your system
> is owned. Never mind the fact that you just opened an email infected
> with the latest 0 day virus that just shut down, or opened ports in
> your firewall (s) so now your system is Owned. Nat is not a firewall
> either, but at leaste a port cant be opened in it by a virus.
>
> I am not afraid of the script kiddies as the troll mentioned. I am
> running a IPcop Firewall on a Celeron 500 MHZ. It protects my domain
> controller, Exchange Server, and Web Site with no problems. I can
> control outgoing and incoming traffic and have detailed logs. It
> causes no preformance hits on any of my PCs.
>
> Get a real firewall
>



 
Reply With Quote
 
AG
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      05-24-2005
The reason for a hardware firewall is that even the cost running an old
computer in electricity is more than paid for in only a couple of months.
A hardware router is about $40 and it costs, on average $20 a month to run a
computer. The hardware router will be 1/10 of that since it's all solid
state.
My SBC provided me with a wireless router for $50, which will pay for itself
in only a couple of months in convenience and such.

AG
"me" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cxwke.5803$(E-Mail Removed)...
> why buy a hardware firewall when you can make one?
>
> As for not being afraid of the script kiddies--I never said I was afraid
> of
> them--quite the contrary--I find them to be very useful in showing me the
> weakness of my defenses--know your enemy, otherwise you will be defeated
> by
> them.
>
>
> As for being a troll--that, I am not. I am simply someone offering my
> opinions, ideas and suggestions just like the rest of the individuals who
> post here.
>
> Those who don't won't honest opinions shouldn't ask for them.
>



 
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
Re: XP Firewall sufficient by itself? Eric Eastridge A+ Certification 1 06-18-2005 08:08 PM
Re: XP Firewall sufficient by itself? A A+ Certification 1 05-28-2005 02:19 AM
Re: XP Firewall sufficient by itself? MF A+ Certification 0 05-23-2005 03:54 AM
newbie - PIX 501 sufficient Kevin Laro Cisco 6 05-25-2004 05:47 PM
system lacked sufficient buffer space ali Java 0 08-18-2003 07:58 AM



Advertisments