Security software for broadband.

I'm not sure if it's illegal in ireland and in any case I use my own. I have however tested the networks shown as available and where possible identified and told the owners of their exposure.

My point is even if these openings do not allow access to the users computers the cost of data downloads depending on the package you are on could be huge if someone decided to use your network for serious data transmission. It seems to me that apart from eircom and commercial services in bars and hotels there is no security advice given by the loads of secondary operators providing this service.
 
sabre Man said:
I use ZoneAlarm for that. It's a decent and free firewall.
Click to expand...
Just a message to all!!

DON'T install ZoneAlarm, i did and o got the blue screen of death and every time i started the computer that happened, I had to restore an image, thank god i didn't have any files in C: i would have lost them all.
 
I have just upgraded to a wireless router* at home to accomodate a couple of laptops with Centrino chips and to upgrade my home office. I am amazed at the number of unprotected WiFi networks accessible from my cul de sac. People could gate crash these and download GB's of data as well as carry on illegal activity recorded against the owner's ISP account. I have found the same in every area in Dublin, even IFSC, where some of the biggset banks in Europe are located.

As well as having a good physical firewall in the router, I took advice and configured my router as follows:-
  • Changed the deafult name of my router
  • Disabled the broadcast of the SSID
  • Confined access to the router by MAC address
  • Enabled WPA-PSK security option with a password key
While the above can be broken by sad techies with time to waste, it should do for the average home user or teleworker. All the settings can be accessed by reading the router manual.

*If interested I bought a Netgear 108Mbps Range Max ADSL Modem Wireless Router Model DG834PN for 149.99 that came with a USB Adaptor from PC World. Running two laptops, a desktop Pc and an XBox sometimes simultaneously with no ill effects.... to date! It doesn't seem to work with a Nintendo DS.
 
carpedeum said:
I am amazed at the number of unprotected WiFi networks accessible from my cul de sac.
Click to expand...
Apart from the security issues you should probably also take steps to configure your own network to avoid interference from these neighbouring networks. For example use NetStumbler to survey which channels are used and how strong each neighbouring network is. Then choose the least busy channel of 1, 6 or 11 for your own. Same goes for other 2.4GHz interference (e.g. microwave ovens - usually only used intermittently but you never know, some baby monitors, TV/digi senders, some cordless phones etc.) although to survey these you might need a spectrum analyser which is usually more cost/hassle than it's worth for most people. See other threads on this topic for more info on potential sources of 2.4GHz interference and how to deal with them.
 
Sn@kebite said:
I presumed the built-in firewalls in a Server OS would be even slightly more reliable than the usual WinXP? Being that a virus on this type of os could mean a company going down. Thats why they are much more expensive. And ive had more errors, crashes on xp and practically none on this os.
Click to expand...

First I've heard about it. Whats the built in Firewall you were using?


Sn@kebite said:
It's the first one on that page: "AVG Internet Security 7.5" [broken link removed]
Click to expand...

That does have a firewall which will do SOME of the things you wanted.
 
Sn@kebite said:
Just a message to all!!

DON'T install ZoneAlarm, i did and o got the blue screen of death and every time i started the computer that happened, I had to restore an image, thank god i didn't have any files in C: i would have lost them all.
Click to expand...

I don't think your experience is that common to be honest. It could be your Server OS or you're "InstallEverythingistus" or any one of a 100 other things.

ZoneAlarm it pretty robust in my experience. Though it used to struggle with dynamic IP's from ISP's when my machine awoke from powersaving. I think there was a hack to fix it. But since it doesn't work on Vista (when I last checked) so I've stopped using it.
 
HighFlier said:
....even if these openings do not allow access to the users computers the cost of data downloads depending on the package you are on could be huge if someone decided to use your network for serious data transmission.....
Click to expand...

Skype does something similar if you close the application but leave the service open. Your machine is used as a node for others.
 
Most hack are written for Internet Explorer, so use something else. I use Netscape - free download in a few minutes and find it fab. No issues with attacks whatsoever. Mozilla is good too.
 
ClubMan said:
Could you not have booted into safe mode and done a System Restore?
Click to expand...

Yes i tried all that, nothing would work.

aircobra19 said:
I don't think your experience is that common to be honest. It could be your Server OS or you're "InstallEverythingistus" or any one of a 100 other things.
Click to expand...

Thats what i thought for a sec! :)

I think i'll go with, "why fix it if it ain't broken?" Afterall i have all my ports closed, and a built-in firewall (which i only found out about) on my linksys modem. Plus i have average experience of what files not to open. (i realise this contradicts all my posts in this thread lol) But i thought it might be good to run a firewall, I was wrong! Probably just my os.
 
aircobra19 said:
First I've heard about it. Whats the built in Firewall you were using?
Click to expand...

It's just the in-built WinXP firewall, although it's deactivated at the moment because it get's a bit annoying :)

Some p2p, torrent programs have an option to "open ports on windows xp firewall" to make a socks connection possible. (and probably any other connection.) Otherwise they won't connect.
 
Sn@kebite said:
It's just the in-built , although it's deactivated at the moment because it get's a bit annoying :)

Some p2p, torrent programs have an option to "open ports on windows xp firewall" to make a socks connection possible. (and probably any other connection.) Otherwise they won't connect.
Click to expand...

XP SP2 and 2003 SP1 Fireall are the same AFAIK.

Some torrent progs are malware. Be careful what you open for them.
 
h**p://www.microsoft.com/nz/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/print.htm


I'd recommend having a look at step 3 on this page,

In particular the part which states :

Computer Associates (12-month free trial)
(h**p://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft/)

If someone was going to use torrents where the software is untested, its easier and safer instead to obtain a serial number of a program e.g zonealarm and use it for free e.g here [broken link removed]
Journalists dont usually report this but it happens a lot.
 
Sn@kebite said:
I presumed the built-in firewalls in a Server OS would be even slightly more reliable than the usual WinXP? Being that a virus on this type of os could mean a company going down. Thats why they are much more expensive. And ive had more errors, crashes on xp and practically none on this os.



It's the first one on that page: "AVG Internet Security 7.5" [broken link removed]
Click to expand...


Sn@kebite said:
Yes thay are.
Click to expand...

I don't get you. You are running an server OS because you think its firewall is better than XPs but now you say you know its the same firewall? That doesn't make sense. At the same time you are trying other firewall applications for what reason I can't figure out. Because they might be better? Do you just like installing software or something?
 
aircobra19 said:
I don't get you. You are running an server OS because you think its firewall is better than XPs but now you say you know its the same firewall? That doesn't make sense. At the same time you are trying other firewall applications for what reason I can't figure out. Because they might be better? Do you just like installing software or something?
Click to expand...

When you said they were the same (AFAYK), i did a google job and found out they are the same.
But i never said the firewall was the only reason I am using WinServer 2003.:)
 
Some of the advice in this thread is just pure stupid - there's no other word for it.

The idea that not running a firewall because nothing bad has happened or it is too annoying is so . . . . early 1990s . . . that it's hard to think some people still believe this. Add to this running somewhat doubtfull copies of licensed software, downloading and sharing files from/with the great unwashed out there on the internet.

Do you also leave your car and house unlocked because they haven't been done yet ?

It is certainly possible to have too much security on your machine - the cost of this is performance, the upside is . . . well, being secure. Having too little security has the advantage that your machine isn't slowed down (marginal anyway) until some internet lowlife connects to an unsecure service on your machine or you download the latest piece of badness dressed up as something cool and it starts talking back to the owner. Suddenly your machine starts going slow and you have contributed to the mess that is the internet today. Maybe you think all your services are off - try 'netstat -a' at a DOS prompt and see what is listening. Then try launching your P2P stuff and see what's listening now.

As for a server firewall being better than a workstation firewall - there's no logic there. There are different reasons to protect servers than to protect workstations. We protect our server with hardware firewalls precisely because we don't want to rely on the server based firewall. We want the server to do server stuff and the firewall to do firewall stuff.


z
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top