Kerry Brown wrote:

>>

>> That one vulnerability was patched in days but it's been months that

>> Windows users have been jumping up and down about it because they

>> finally came up with ONE exploit. BFD. If you keep your Ubuntu

>> up-to-date and enable a hard NAT firewall in your router, it's BULLET

>> PROOF compared to Windows of any flavor.

>>

>

> You really don't understand security do you? Yes, currently Linux isn't

> attacked as much as Windows so it's less likely you will be the victim

> of crooks while surfing the Internet using Linux rather than Windows.

> This fact does not make you invulnerable or as you say BULLET PROOF. By

> your own admission, quoted above, Linux needs to be kept up to date and

> you need to protect all devices in your network. That was the point of

> my original post to this thread. Software alone is not a strong enough

> security measure. Your posts that everyone should switch to Linux don't

> address any of this, until your last reply to me. The Internet is not a

> safe place. You need to take some basic precautions no matter what OS

> you happen to be using. If someone is not practicing safe surfing and

> not keeping their OS and applications up to date switching from Windows

> to Linux won't help them. If your reason for posting here is to help

> people by answering their questions then you should expand on your

> answers a bit rather than just suggesting everyone switch to Linux.

> Switching to Linux may be a valid option in some cases but the switch

> alone isn't the full answer. If you have other reasons for posting then

> maybe you could enlighten us on what they are.

>

 

With Ubuntu, a very obvious RED icon appears with a large balloon

notification stating that there are updates to *everything* installed on

your computer. No need to run round updating everything individually

which most home users *never* do. Note I said *compared to Windows*,

it's bullet proof. I did not say that it is bullet proof.

 

Alias

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 13:27:14 -0500

Nonny <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:17:55 -0400, norm <noone@nowhere.net> wrote:

>

> >> If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that

> >> Windows has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to

> >> break it as Windows does now.

> >

> >However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

> >spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

>

> I really couldn't care less. My computer works fine. That's all I

> care about.

 

Syntax error...forwarding to Albright.

Hey Albright !

Done

 

--

Hobbes,Tiger Extraordinaire

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:46:06 -0400, Hobbes <Hobbes@Calvins.lol> wrote:

>On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 13:27:14 -0500

>Nonny <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote:

>

>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:17:55 -0400, norm <noone@nowhere.net> wrote:

>>

>> >> If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that

>> >> Windows has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to

>> >> break it as Windows does now.

>> >

>> >However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

>> >spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

>>

>> I really couldn't care less. My computer works fine. That's all I

>> care about.

>

>Syntax error...forwarding to Albright.

>Hey Albright !

>Done

 

How much did you pay to enroll in Frank's How to be a idiot class?

fb wrote:

> norm wrote:

>> Nonny wrote:

>>

>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:13:20 +0100, "Marc " <RmEaMrOcVE@imarc.co.uk>

>>> wrote:

>>>

>>>> "Nonny" <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>>>> news:nmvn84hdn2p637f3ugb3eeq4oig4jk0t15@4ax.com...

>>>>

>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 21:48:00 -0700, Carey Frisch [MVP]

>>>>> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> With the excellent Windows OneCare package, there is

>>>>>> no need to install a multitude of different security software.

>>>>>

>>>>> With the excellent free apps available, there is no need to spend

>>>>> money.

>>>>

>>>> Vista is the only modern OS that requires all this crap to stay secure.

>>>> Hope that changes with Windows 7.

>>>

>>>

>>> If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that Windows

>>> has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to break it as

>>> Windows does now.

>>

>>

>> However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

>> spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

>>

>

> Proly better, seeing as how most linux users falsely believe their linux

> boxes are bullet proof!

> "Easy pickings" is the term I'd use to best describe them should linux

> ever become really "main stream", which proly will never happen.

 

I don't think that any linux installation is bulletproof any more than I

think that vista now is as full of holes as previous windows iterations,

and ill-informed statements to the contrary do no one any good. But I

can still entertain the idea that the "easy pickings" sweepstake has

long been won by ms, and will probably never be matched by linux

regardless whether it (in your opinion) becomes mainstream or not.

 

--

norm

FB wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> Kerry Brown wrote:

>>

>>> Assuming you haven't somehow disabled Windows Defender you have a

>>> reasonable amount of protection as far as anti-malware software is

>>> concerned. Note that this does not make you invulnerable. You will

>>> still be infected if you don't practice safe hex/surfing/computing or

>>> whatever you want to call it.

>>>

>>> Even more important than what programs you have installed is keeping

>>> your computer up to date and using a bit of common sense. By keeping

>>> your computer up to date this doesn't mean just Windows updates. You

>>> need to make sure every program installed on your computer is up

>>> date. Many of them do a poor job of doing this themselves. At least

>>> once a month you should manually check for updates on every program

>>> you have installed.

>>>

>>> You need to pay attention to what is happening on your computer. If

>>> you see a balloon warning by the clock that some program needs

>>> updating pay attention to it. If it's a program you recognise then

>>> allow the update. If you don't recognise it find out what it is and

>>> why it's warning you. Google is a great help for this. If a UAC

>>> prompt pops up unexpectedly then figure out why before you allow it.

>>> If you're not sure write down the details of what you were doing that

>>> caused it, don't allow it, then Google it to see what may have caused

>>> it. If you are on a web site and you are prompted to install or allow

>>> something unexpectedly don't do it. Never, ever, ever click on an ad

>>> on any web site. Never, ever open any email attachment unless you

>>> were expecting it. Even if the attachment is from someone you know

>>> don't open it unless you were expecting an attachment form them. If

>>> you weren't expecting it then email them to see if they really sent

>>> the attachment before opening it. Basically if you're not sure of

>>> something, don't do it until you are sure.

>>>

>>> Malware is very big business. The malware developers are always ahead

>>> of the anti-malware developers. There is no magic software that will

>>> make you invulnerable. Your best defense is user education, keeping

>>> everything on your computer up to date, then lastly installing

>>> anti-malware software.

>>>

>>

>> Actually, the best defense is to not use Windows of any flavor and

>> move up to Linux Ubuntu which is bullet proof compared to Windows.

>>

>> http://www.ubuntu.com

>>

>> Alias

>

> Still spamming and trolling I see.

 

You don't like what I post? I love it!

> More than likely you have an infected

> linux box and don't even know or can't bring yourself to admit it.

> You're the quintessential loser, loser!

 

So, hot shot, when will you hack my Linux box? Never? Yep, Frank, once

again, is all talk and no walk.

 

Alias

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 13:52:39 -0500

Ringmaster <bigtop@VistaGeneralCircus.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:46:06 -0400, Hobbes <Hobbes@Calvins.lol> wrote:

>

> >On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 13:27:14 -0500

> >Nonny <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote:

> >

> >> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:17:55 -0400, norm <noone@nowhere.net> wrote:

> >>

> >> >> If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that

> >> >> Windows has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to

> >> >> break it as Windows does now.

> >> >

> >> >However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

> >> >spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

> >>

> >> I really couldn't care less. My computer works fine. That's all I

> >> care about.

> >

> >Syntax error...forwarding to Albright.

> >Hey Albright !

> >Done

>

> How much did you pay to enroll in Frank's How to be a idiot class?

 

$3.69....but I got the referral discount, thanks to you.

 

--

Hobbes,Tiger Extraordinaire

Ringmaster wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:46:06 -0400, Hobbes <Hobbes@Calvins.lol> wrote:

>

>

>>On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 13:27:14 -0500

>>Nonny <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote:

>>

>>

>>>On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 14:17:55 -0400, norm <noone@nowhere.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>

>>>>>If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that

>>>>>Windows has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to

>>>>>break it as Windows does now.

>>>>

>>>>However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

>>>>spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

>>>

>>>I really couldn't care less. My computer works fine. That's all I

>>>care about.

>>

>>Syntax error...forwarding to Albright.

>>Hey Albright !

>>Done

>

>

> How much did you pay to enroll in Frank's How to be a idiot class?

 

You are the president and number 1 contributor to the "I'm an idiot

club", you idiot!...LOL!

You'll never change will you mr gotemeyer. You're just a stupid, big

mouth, insulting, arrogant, pompous piece of wet useless shit and a

brainless asshole loser.

FB wrote:

> Alias wrote:

>

>> Kerry Brown wrote:

>>

>>> Assuming you haven't somehow disabled Windows Defender you have a

>>> reasonable amount of protection as far as anti-malware software is

>>> concerned. Note that this does not make you invulnerable. You will

>>> still be infected if you don't practice safe hex/surfing/computing or

>>> whatever you want to call it.

>>>

>>> Even more important than what programs you have installed is keeping

>>> your computer up to date and using a bit of common sense. By keeping

>>> your computer up to date this doesn't mean just Windows updates. You

>>> need to make sure every program installed on your computer is up

>>> date. Many of them do a poor job of doing this themselves. At least

>>> once a month you should manually check for updates on every program

>>> you have installed.

>>>

>>> You need to pay attention to what is happening on your computer. If

>>> you see a balloon warning by the clock that some program needs

>>> updating pay attention to it. If it's a program you recognise then

>>> allow the update. If you don't recognise it find out what it is and

>>> why it's warning you. Google is a great help for this. If a UAC

>>> prompt pops up unexpectedly then figure out why before you allow it.

>>> If you're not sure write down the details of what you were doing that

>>> caused it, don't allow it, then Google it to see what may have caused

>>> it. If you are on a web site and you are prompted to install or allow

>>> something unexpectedly don't do it. Never, ever, ever click on an ad

>>> on any web site. Never, ever open any email attachment unless you

>>> were expecting it. Even if the attachment is from someone you know

>>> don't open it unless you were expecting an attachment form them. If

>>> you weren't expecting it then email them to see if they really sent

>>> the attachment before opening it. Basically if you're not sure of

>>> something, don't do it until you are sure.

>>>

>>> Malware is very big business. The malware developers are always ahead

>>> of the anti-malware developers. There is no magic software that will

>>> make you invulnerable. Your best defense is user education, keeping

>>> everything on your computer up to date, then lastly installing

>>> anti-malware software.

>>>

>>

>> Actually, the best defense is to not use Windows of any flavor and

>> move up to Linux Ubuntu which is bullet proof compared to Windows.

>>

>> http://www.ubuntu.com

>>

>> Alias

>

> Still spamming and trolling I see.

 

You don't like what I post? I love it!

> More than likely you have an infected linux box and don't even know

or can't bring yourself to admit it.

> You're the quintessential loser, loser!

 

So, hot shot, when will you hack my Linux box? Never? Yep, Frank, once

again, is all talk and no walk.

 

Alias

Alias wrote:

> fb wrote:

>

>> norm wrote:

>>

>>> Nonny wrote:

>>>

>>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:13:20 +0100, "Marc " <RmEaMrOcVE@imarc.co.uk>

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> "Nonny" <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:nmvn84hdn2p637f3ugb3eeq4oig4jk0t15@4ax.com...

>>>>>

>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 21:48:00 -0700, Carey Frisch [MVP]

>>>>>> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> With the excellent Windows OneCare package, there is

>>>>>>> no need to install a multitude of different security software.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> With the excellent free apps available, there is no need to spend

>>>>>> money.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Vista is the only modern OS that requires all this crap to stay

>>>>> secure.

>>>>> Hope that changes with Windows 7.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that Windows

>>>> has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to break it as

>>>> Windows does now.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

>>> spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

>>>

>>

>> Proly better, seeing as how most linux users falsely believe their

>> linux boxes are bullet proof!

>> "Easy pickings" is the term I'd use to best describe them should linux

>> ever become really "main stream", which proly will never happen.

>

>

> All talk and no walk. Can you hack my machine? No? Why not, asshole?

 

Hahaha...you don't know if I haven't already done so you stupid asshole

loser!...LOL!

norm wrote:

> fb wrote:

>

>> norm wrote:

>>

>>> Nonny wrote:

>>>

>>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:13:20 +0100, "Marc " <RmEaMrOcVE@imarc.co.uk>

>>>> wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> "Nonny" <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>>>>> news:nmvn84hdn2p637f3ugb3eeq4oig4jk0t15@4ax.com...

>>>>>

>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 21:48:00 -0700, Carey Frisch [MVP]

>>>>>> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> With the excellent Windows OneCare package, there is

>>>>>>> no need to install a multitude of different security software.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> With the excellent free apps available, there is no need to spend

>>>>>> money.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> Vista is the only modern OS that requires all this crap to stay

>>>>> secure.

>>>>> Hope that changes with Windows 7.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that Windows

>>>> has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to break it as

>>>> Windows does now.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

>>> spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

>>>

>>

>> Proly better, seeing as how most linux users falsely believe their

>> linux boxes are bullet proof!

>> "Easy pickings" is the term I'd use to best describe them should linux

>> ever become really "main stream", which proly will never happen.

>

>

> I don't think that any linux installation is bulletproof any more than I

> think that vista now is as full of holes as previous windows iterations,

> and ill-informed statements to the contrary do no one any good. But I

> can still entertain the idea that the "easy pickings" sweepstake has

> long been won by ms, and will probably never be matched by linux

> regardless whether it (in your opinion) becomes mainstream or not.

>

It's a moot point cause linux will never become mainstream, so you can't

truthfully compare the two.

Alias wrote:

> Kerry Brown wrote:

>

>>>

>>> That one vulnerability was patched in days but it's been months that

>>> Windows users have been jumping up and down about it because they

>>> finally came up with ONE exploit. BFD. If you keep your Ubuntu

>>> up-to-date and enable a hard NAT firewall in your router, it's BULLET

>>> PROOF compared to Windows of any flavor.

>>>

>>

>> You really don't understand security do you? Yes, currently Linux

>> isn't attacked as much as Windows so it's less likely you will be the

>> victim of crooks while surfing the Internet using Linux rather than

>> Windows. This fact does not make you invulnerable or as you say BULLET

>> PROOF. By your own admission, quoted above, Linux needs to be kept up

>> to date and you need to protect all devices in your network. That was

>> the point of my original post to this thread. Software alone is not a

>> strong enough security measure. Your posts that everyone should switch

>> to Linux don't address any of this, until your last reply to me. The

>> Internet is not a safe place. You need to take some basic precautions

>> no matter what OS you happen to be using. If someone is not practicing

>> safe surfing and not keeping their OS and applications up to date

>> switching from Windows to Linux won't help them. If your reason for

>> posting here is to help people by answering their questions then you

>> should expand on your answers a bit rather than just suggesting

>> everyone switch to Linux. Switching to Linux may be a valid option in

>> some cases but the switch alone isn't the full answer. If you have

>> other reasons for posting then maybe you could enlighten us on what

>> they are.

>>

>

> With Ubuntu, a very obvious RED icon appears with a large balloon

> notification stating that there are updates to *everything* installed on

> your computer. No need to run round updating everything individually

> which most home users *never* do. Note I said *compared to Windows*,

> it's bullet proof. I did not say that it is bullet proof.

>

> Alias

 

Vista's Windows update does the same thing, if enabled.

Of course you wouldn't know that fact cause you don't use Vista.

The world speaks about the attacks on Windows, Windows only. Why the

Windows are so notorious ? Is there anyone care to know that Linux are

the most attacked OS for last few months ? But none of them was fully

success. That is the reason behind most of the users or critics unknown

about.

 

'*Read here for more*'

(http://www.zone-h.org/component/option,com_frontpage/Itemid,1/)

 

I am dual booter and found Ubuntu is much safer and faster than Vista.

Vista it self not slow, But all the crap AV, Anti spy,mal,keylogger and

so on make it damn slow and crawl.

 

Linux is slowly and steadily catching up and will over take the windows

in a few years. The most of the windows users are frustrated and Unhappy

towards the MS for not providing an OS capable of what they paid

 

 

--

phoenix_abhi

 

'Technical Development and INDIA'

(http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/home.jsp)

 

:cool:

------------------------------------------------------------------------

phoenix_abhi's Profile: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/member.php?userid=110

View this thread: http://winvistaclub.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17476

"Alias" <aka@mascaradoyanónimo.jo> wrote in message

news:g6ifaj$opv$1@aioe.org...

> Chris S. wrote:

>>

>> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.co.uk> wrote in message

>> news:g6i7pm$l7q$1@aioe.org...

>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:

>>>> Please substantiate your claim that routers come without the firewall

>>>> enabled by default. Document one such model, from any manufacturer. If

>>>> you have a list, so much the better. Heck, even if you can't find

>>>> documentation, just name them and I'll go find out what's what, even if

>>>> I have to track someone down on the phone and have them personally

>>>> check.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Edimax BR 6104-K is the one I use and I have the same experience with

>>> numerous Conceptronic routers for starters. They also come with blank

>>> passwords. The little instruction booklet that comes with them gives

>>> instructions on how to access the router, create a password and enable

>>> the firewall.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>> The Edimax and Conceptronic routers seem to be made by the same

>> manufacturer. Their manuals contain essentially the same verbiage.

>> Both manuals note that the default user name and password are

>> "admin" and "1234". There is no "Firewall Enable" function per se.

>> Like all routers, "Firewall" functionality is in selectively allowing

>> or disallowing protocols and/or port access. A consumer class

>> router is just a router.

>>

>> ...Chris

>

> In both there is a section called, of all things, "Firewall" with two

> choices: enable or disable.

>

> Alias

 

So they made a menu item called "Firewall". All of the features and

functions under that menu item are available in about every $20+

consumer grade routers. Noticed that that particular model has

been discontinued as well. Where is the default password "blank"

mentioned?. The "little instruction book" should perhaps be tossed and

the full manual downloaded from the Edimax Support site.

 

Chris

Alias wrote:

> Chris S. wrote:

>>

>> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.co.uk> wrote in message

>> news:g6i7pm$l7q$1@aioe.org...

>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:

>>>> Please substantiate your claim that routers come without the

>>>> firewall enabled by default. Document one such model, from any

>>>> manufacturer. If you have a list, so much the better. Heck, even if

>>>> you can't find documentation, just name them and I'll go find out

>>>> what's what, even if I have to track someone down on the phone and

>>>> have them personally check.

>>>>

>>>

>>> Edimax BR 6104-K is the one I use and I have the same experience with

>>> numerous Conceptronic routers for starters. They also come with blank

>>> passwords. The little instruction booklet that comes with them gives

>>> instructions on how to access the router, create a password and

>>> enable the firewall.

>>>

>>> Alias

>>

>> The Edimax and Conceptronic routers seem to be made by the same

>> manufacturer. Their manuals contain essentially the same verbiage.

>> Both manuals note that the default user name and password are

>> "admin" and "1234". There is no "Firewall Enable" function per se.

>> Like all routers, "Firewall" functionality is in selectively allowing

>> or disallowing protocols and/or port access. A consumer class

>> router is just a router.

>>

>> ...Chris

>

> In both there is a section called, of all things, "Firewall" with two

> choices: enable or disable.

>

 

The man is talking about FW technology which is setting rules to allow

inbound or outbound packets to/from a FW by setting packet filtering

rules to filter packets by port TCP/UDP, IP (WAN/LAN IP), protocol type

FTP HTTP, ICMP and other protocols etc etc, subnet mask or domain.

 

I looked at the manual for that piece of junk you're talking about. All

it's talking about is SPI enabling or disabling that, which is on by

default by most other home user NAT routers that have SPI.

 

There are lots of home user routers that don't have SPI at all, but

still act as a firewall or border device to block unsolicited inbound

traffic from reaching the LAN and to allow solicited inbound traffic

back from a remote IP to the machine and the program running on the

machine that made the solicitation.

FB wrote:

> norm wrote:

>

>> fb wrote:

>>

>>> norm wrote:

>>>

>>>> Nonny wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:13:20 +0100, "Marc " <RmEaMrOcVE@imarc.co.uk>

>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> "Nonny" <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>>>>>> news:nmvn84hdn2p637f3ugb3eeq4oig4jk0t15@4ax.com...

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 21:48:00 -0700, Carey Frisch [MVP]

>>>>>>> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> With the excellent Windows OneCare package, there is

>>>>>>>> no need to install a multitude of different security software.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> With the excellent free apps available, there is no need to spend

>>>>>>> money.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> Vista is the only modern OS that requires all this crap to stay

>>>>>> secure.

>>>>>> Hope that changes with Windows 7.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that Windows

>>>>> has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to break it as

>>>>> Windows does now.

>>>>

>>>>

>>>>

>>>> However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

>>>> spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

>>>>

>>>

>>> Proly better, seeing as how most linux users falsely believe their

>>> linux boxes are bullet proof!

>>> "Easy pickings" is the term I'd use to best describe them should

>>> linux ever become really "main stream", which proly will never happen.

>>

>>

>> I don't think that any linux installation is bulletproof any more than

>> I think that vista now is as full of holes as previous windows

>> iterations, and ill-informed statements to the contrary do no one any

>> good. But I can still entertain the idea that the "easy pickings"

>> sweepstake has long been won by ms, and will probably never be matched

>> by linux regardless whether it (in your opinion) becomes mainstream or

>> not.

>>

> It's a moot point cause linux will never become mainstream, so you can't

> truthfully compare the two.

 

If you can SUPPOSE that linux will never become mainstream, I certainly

can make a comparison based on EXISTING information, regardless of

whether linux is mainstream in your opinion or not.

--

norm

"Kicking Albright" <Albright@Kicking.com> wrote in message

news:eaG7eFC8IHA.2336@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...

> Alias wrote:

>> Chris S. wrote:

>>>

>>> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.co.uk> wrote in message

>>> news:g6i7pm$l7q$1@aioe.org...

>>>> Gary S. Terhune wrote:

>>>>> Please substantiate your claim that routers come without the firewall

>>>>> enabled by default. Document one such model, from any manufacturer. If

>>>>> you have a list, so much the better. Heck, even if you can't find

>>>>> documentation, just name them and I'll go find out what's what, even

>>>>> if I have to track someone down on the phone and have them personally

>>>>> check.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Edimax BR 6104-K is the one I use and I have the same experience with

>>>> numerous Conceptronic routers for starters. They also come with blank

>>>> passwords. The little instruction booklet that comes with them gives

>>>> instructions on how to access the router, create a password and enable

>>>> the firewall.

>>>>

>>>> Alias

>>>

>>> The Edimax and Conceptronic routers seem to be made by the same

>>> manufacturer. Their manuals contain essentially the same verbiage.

>>> Both manuals note that the default user name and password are

>>> "admin" and "1234". There is no "Firewall Enable" function per se.

>>> Like all routers, "Firewall" functionality is in selectively allowing

>>> or disallowing protocols and/or port access. A consumer class

>>> router is just a router.

>>>

>>> ...Chris

>>

>> In both there is a section called, of all things, "Firewall" with two

>> choices: enable or disable.

>>

>

> The man is talking about FW technology which is setting rules to allow

> inbound or outbound packets to/from a FW by setting packet filtering rules

> to filter packets by port TCP/UDP, IP (WAN/LAN IP), protocol type FTP

> HTTP, ICMP and other protocols etc etc, subnet mask or domain.

>

> I looked at the manual for that piece of junk you're talking about. All

> it's talking about is SPI enabling or disabling that, which is on by

> default by most other home user NAT routers that have SPI.

>

> There are lots of home user routers that don't have SPI at all, but still

> act as a firewall or border device to block unsolicited inbound traffic

> from reaching the LAN and to allow solicited inbound traffic back from a

> remote IP to the machine and the program running on the machine that made

> the solicitation.

 

Quite true. Statefull Packet Inspection (SPI) is a part of most newer

SOHO routers and may or may not be noted in the spec sheet.

A menu item labeled "Firewall" that allows control of what about

all consumer grade routers can do seems little more than marketing

crap.

 

Chris (a real name)

"phoenix_abhi" <phoenix_abhi.3d81dw@winvistaclub.com> wrote in message

news:phoenix_abhi.3d81dw@winvistaclub.com...

>

> The world speaks about the attacks on Windows, Windows only. Why the

> Windows are so notorious ? Is there anyone care to know that Linux are

> the most attacked OS for last few months ? But none of them was fully

> success. That is the reason behind most of the users or critics unknown

> about.

>

> '*Read here for more*'

> (http://www.zone-h.org/component/option,com_frontpage/Itemid,1/)

>

> I am dual booter and found Ubuntu is much safer and faster than Vista.

> Vista it self not slow, But all the crap AV, Anti spy,mal,keylogger and

> so on make it damn slow and crawl.

>

> Linux is slowly and steadily catching up and will over take the windows

> in a few years. The most of the windows users are frustrated and Unhappy

> towards the MS for not providing an OS capable of what they paid

>

>

 

In a few "hundred" years judging by 15 years = 1 % market share.

 

More likely Windows, Apple, and Linux will co-exist for many years to come.

 

The Open Source community would need to "buy out" MS for Linux to overtake

Windows in a "few" years.

And that isn't gonna happen...unless you heard something?

norm wrote:

> FB wrote:

>

>> norm wrote:

>>

>>> fb wrote:

>>>

>>>> norm wrote:

>>>>

>>>>> Nonny wrote:

>>>>>

>>>>>> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 11:13:20 +0100, "Marc " <RmEaMrOcVE@imarc.co.uk>

>>>>>> wrote:

>>>>>>

>>>>>>> "Nonny" <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>>>>>>> news:nmvn84hdn2p637f3ugb3eeq4oig4jk0t15@4ax.com...

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 21:48:00 -0700, Carey Frisch [MVP]

>>>>>>>> <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> With the excellent Windows OneCare package, there is

>>>>>>>>> no need to install a multitude of different security software.

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> With the excellent free apps available, there is no need to spend

>>>>>>>> money.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Vista is the only modern OS that requires all this crap to stay

>>>>>>> secure.

>>>>>>> Hope that changes with Windows 7.

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> If the table were turned and Linux had the market share that Windows

>>>>>> has, Linux would have all the world's hackers working to break it as

>>>>>> Windows does now.

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> However, a question remains. Would they succeed in the same

>>>>> spectacular manner they have done with windows? )

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Proly better, seeing as how most linux users falsely believe their

>>>> linux boxes are bullet proof!

>>>> "Easy pickings" is the term I'd use to best describe them should

>>>> linux ever become really "main stream", which proly will never happen.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> I don't think that any linux installation is bulletproof any more

>>> than I think that vista now is as full of holes as previous windows

>>> iterations, and ill-informed statements to the contrary do no one any

>>> good. But I can still entertain the idea that the "easy pickings"

>>> sweepstake has long been won by ms, and will probably never be

>>> matched by linux regardless whether it (in your opinion) becomes

>>> mainstream or not.

>>>

>> It's a moot point cause linux will never become mainstream, so you

>> can't truthfully compare the two.

>

>

> If you can SUPPOSE that linux will never become mainstream, I certainly

> can make a comparison based on EXISTING information, regardless of

> whether linux is mainstream in your opinion or not.

 

Knock yourself out!

Bullsh*t. You're a liar, plain and simple.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://grystmill.com

 

"Alias" <aka@mascaradoyanónimo.jo> wrote in message

news:g6i6qs$fv6$1@aioe.org...

> Kicking Albright wrote:

>> Alias wrote:

>>> Kicking Albright wrote:

>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>> Kicking Albright wrote:

>>>>>> Alias wrote:

>>>>>>> Nonny wrote:

>>>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 20:15:00 -0700, Flyerfan27

>>>>>>>> <Flyerfan27@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> Hello,

>>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>>> I recently removed McAfee form my laptop with Vista Home Premium

>>>>>>>>> OP. I installed the free version of AVG Antivirus for virus

>>>>>>>>> protection in McAfee's place. I was going to look for a firewall

>>>>>>>>> program too, but saw that the Vista built in Windows Firewall took

>>>>>>>>> over that job. My question is do these 2 programs give me enough

>>>>>>>>> protection for my laptop? Can I trust these 2 programs to protect

>>>>>>>>> my desktop computer? My desktop is hard wired to my router

>>>>>>>>

>>>>>>>> Your router has a firewall too,

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>> Usually, it has to be enabled because it isn't enabled by default.

>>>>>>>

>>>>>>

>>>>>> This is garbage Alias.

>>>>>

>>>>> Um, no it isn't.

>>>>>

>>>>

>>>> Yes it is Alais.

>>>

>>> Um, no it isn't and you can't prove otherwise.

>>

>>

>> A router that is used in the home sector is not running FW software. One

>> doesn't go around turning on or enabling FW software on a true packet

>> filtering FW router, which the FW is on by default and doing its job. The

>> router acts as a FW naturally and doesn't need to have something enabled

>> or disable to act as a border device or FW.

>>

>> <copied - You came with this off the wall statement which is not correct.

>> A router acts as a border device or firewall naturally by blocking all

>> unsolicited inbound packets by default and allows solicited inbound

>> packets to any computer that has sent outbound packets to a remote IP --

>> the solicitation for traffic.

>>

>> >>>>> Usually, it has to be enabled because it isn't enabled by default.

>>

>> That statement above is BS, because a router does that naturally by the

>> use of NAT and doesn't need something enabled to do so.

>

> I have installed dozens of routers and ALL of them, be they Conceptronic,

> Edimax or whatever come with a default blank password and the firewall

> disabled. Maybe you should check yours being as you're using the virus

> prone Windows.

>

> Alias

I don't know what brand router you're using, but if it has a true firewall,

it must have some kind of configuration page, list of open or blocked ports,

port-forwarding, or whatever. If it doesn't have that ability to be

configured, I don't see how a firewall could be present (other than Windows

Firewall), or if there is one, it's seriously idiot-proofed and therefore

not very good. You got a make/model for that device so it can be looked up?

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://grystmill.com

 

"Nonny" <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:ajbp84ldqrk1rf3bdpsh5npfd4dp40k4q7@4ax.com...

> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 09:09:41 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:

>

>>Every router I've ever installed that has a firewall had the firewall

>>enabled by default.

>

> Thank you for that!

>

> When I read that it needed to be configured I scratched my head

> wondering how I'd missed that. I immediately went to the

> configuration panel for my router and couldn't find a damned thing.

>

> I should have remembered that I'd put my system to several different

> tests online to check my security with only the router for a firewall

> and it passed every test thrown at it.

Aww, geez! Can't you stop shilling? Ever? What, were you born in a carnival?

 

You have no freaking idea what I've tried and not tried, but it I DO know

that when it comes to Microsoft, they have a terrible track record with most

apps. Only reason I use them is so I can assist others who can't figure out

how to run the damned things themselves. I'm sure that sooner or later I'll

have to give OneCare (yet another) try, but I'll wait until a client needs

assistance with it, which I'm sure they will. Meanwhile, the usual panoply

of free or shareware that is recommended by real MVPs will do just fine.

There certainly isn't anything to show that OneCare is any *better* than the

tried and true.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://grystmill.com

 

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message

news:88242114-DC65-4BCA-9460-D1A98DAF6D9E@microsoft.com...

> Another poster who apparently has not even tried

> Windows OneCare v.2.5 and experienced its

> excellent security features and capabilities.

>

> --

> Carey Frisch

> Microsoft MVP

> Windows Desktop Experience -

> Windows System & Performance

>

>

>

>

> "Gary S. Terhune" wrote:

>

>> And you're just as foolish as Carey.

>>

>> --

>> Gary S. Terhune

>> MS-MVP Shell/User

>> http://grystmill.com

>>

>> "Nonny" <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>> news:nbrn84ts6kajn3ombm7esfts1kp05qpl44@4ax.com...

>> > On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:33:00 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"

>> > <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>> >

>> >>Install a good, comprehensive, security program,

>> >>such as Windows OneCare, and you'll not have to

>> >>worry about those issues. You can try it FREE

>> >>for ninety (90) days. This is a brand new version

>> >>and includes a very robust firewall.

>> >

>> > So does his router. That plus Vista's native firewall will cover him

>> > just fine in that department and it won't cost him anything.

>>

>>

>>

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:08:04 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:

>I don't know what brand router you're using, but if it has a true firewall,

>it must have some kind of configuration page, list of open or blocked ports,

>port-forwarding, or whatever. If it doesn't have that ability to be

>configured, I don't see how a firewall could be present (other than Windows

>Firewall), or if there is one, it's seriously idiot-proofed and therefore

>not very good. You got a make/model for that device so it can be looked up?

 

Linksys WRT54GS

Thank you for answering my question. To summarize,

you are criticizing a product (OneCare v.2.5) which you

have absolutely no experience with....wow!

 

--

Carey Frisch

Microsoft MVP

Windows Desktop Experience -

Windows Vista Enthusiast

 

---------------------------------------------------------------

 

"Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote in message news:%23cuoEAE8IHA.4864@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...

Aww, geez! Can't you stop shilling? Ever? What, were you born in a carnival?

 

You have no freaking idea what I've tried and not tried, but it I DO know

that when it comes to Microsoft, they have a terrible track record with most

apps. Only reason I use them is so I can assist others who can't figure out

how to run the damned things themselves. I'm sure that sooner or later I'll

have to give OneCare (yet another) try, but I'll wait until a client needs

assistance with it, which I'm sure they will. Meanwhile, the usual panoply

of free or shareware that is recommended by real MVPs will do just fine.

There certainly isn't anything to show that OneCare is any *better* than the

tried and true.

 

--

Gary S. Terhune

MS-MVP Shell/User

http://grystmill.com

 

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote in message

news:88242114-DC65-4BCA-9460-D1A98DAF6D9E@microsoft.com...

> Another poster who apparently has not even tried

> Windows OneCare v.2.5 and experienced its

> excellent security features and capabilities.

>

> --

> Carey Frisch

> Microsoft MVP

> Windows Desktop Experience -

> Windows System & Performance

>

>

>

>

> "Gary S. Terhune" wrote:

>

>> And you're just as foolish as Carey.

>>

>> --

>> Gary S. Terhune

>> MS-MVP Shell/User

>> http://grystmill.com

>>

>> "Nonny" <nonnymoose@yahoo.com> wrote in message

>> news:nbrn84ts6kajn3ombm7esfts1kp05qpl44@4ax.com...

>> > On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 22:33:00 -0500, "Carey Frisch [MVP]"

>> > <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com> wrote:

>> >

>> >>Install a good, comprehensive, security program,

>> >>such as Windows OneCare, and you'll not have to

>> >>worry about those issues. You can try it FREE

>> >>for ninety (90) days. This is a brand new version

>> >>and includes a very robust firewall.

>> >

>> > So does his router. That plus Vista's native firewall will cover him

>> > just fine in that department and it won't cost him anything.

>>

>>

>>

On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 16:08:04 -0700, "Gary S. Terhune" <none> wrote:

>I don't know what brand router you're using, but if it has a true firewall,

>it must have some kind of configuration page, list of open or blocked ports,

>port-forwarding, or whatever. If it doesn't have that ability to be

>configured, I don't see how a firewall could be present (other than Windows

>Firewall), or if there is one, it's seriously idiot-proofed and therefore

>not very good. You got a make/model for that device so it can be looked up?

 

Linksys WRT54GS V7 802.11g

Hello Gary,

 

Thank you so much for jumping in to this conversation. I have to admit I

don't understand all the talking going back and forth about the routers. It

all seems like another language to me. Since you sound like one of the more

knowledgeable people can you please tell me if my firewall is already on or

if it needs to be activated on my router? I have Verizon Fios and the router

they gave me is an Actiontec MI424-WR Ver. D.

 

I sure would appreciate the help. I just want to avoid getting another one

of those spywares. That spyware affected me as bad as any virus I have had. I

can't see how those spywares can be legal for a company to do. It is just as

malicious as any virus.

 

Thank you,

James

 

 

"Gary S. Terhune" wrote:

> Please substantiate your claim that routers come without the firewall

> enabled by default. Document one such model, from any manufacturer. If you

> have a list, so much the better. Heck, even if you can't find documentation,

> just name them and I'll go find out what's what, even if I have to track

> someone down on the phone and have them personally check.

>

> --

> Gary S. Terhune

> MS-MVP Shell/User

> http://grystmill.com

>

> "Alias" <aka@masked&anonymous.co.uk> wrote in message

> news:g6i3do$b1g$1@registered.motzarella.org...

> > Hobbes wrote:

> >> On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 10:31:17 -0400

> >> Kicking Albright <Albright@Kicking.com> wrote:

> >>

> >>> Alias wrote:

> >>>> Kicking Albright wrote:

> >>>>> Alias wrote:

> >>>>>> Nonny wrote:

> >>>>>>> On Sat, 26 Jul 2008 20:15:00 -0700, Flyerfan27

> >>>>>>> <Flyerfan27@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:

> >>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>> Hello,

> >>>>>>>>

> >>>>>>>> I recently removed McAfee form my laptop with Vista Home

> >>>>>>>> Premium OP. I installed the free version of AVG Antivirus for

> >>>>>>>> virus protection in McAfee's place. I was going to look for a

> >>>>>>>> firewall program too, but saw that the Vista built in Windows

> >>>>>>>> Firewall took over that job. My question is do these 2 programs

> >>>>>>>> give me enough protection for my laptop? Can I trust these 2

> >>>>>>>> programs to protect my desktop computer? My desktop is hard

> >>>>>>>> wired to my router

> >>>>>>> Your router has a firewall too,

> >>>>>> Usually, it has to be enabled because it isn't enabled by default.

> >>>>>>

> >>>>> This is garbage Alias.

> >>>> Um, no it isn't.

> >>>>

> >>> Yes it is Alais.

> >>

> >> Alias doesn't know squat...pay him no mind.

> >>

> >

> > Another who can only hurl personal attacks and offer no substantiation.

> >

> > Alias

>

>

>