Re: Firewall Software Recommendations? - Network

This is a discussion on Re: Firewall Software Recommendations? - Network ; Sebastian G. wrote: > louise wrote: > >> Sebastian G. wrote: >>> louise wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I >>>> like Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 48

Thread: Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

  1. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    Sebastian G. wrote:
    > louise wrote:
    >
    >> Sebastian G. wrote:
    >>> louise wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I
    >>>> like Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and
    >>>> informative.
    >>>
    >>> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.

    >>
    >> What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?

    >
    >
    > Google and Wikipedia exist...
    >
    > (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software
    > for the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any
    > security.)


    What the hell kind of arrogant answer was that?

  2. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    David H. Lipman wrote:
    > From: "Sebastian G."
    >
    > |
    > |
    > | Google and Wikipedia exist...
    > |
    > | (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software for
    > | the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any security.)
    >
    > One can check software that has vulnerabilities and if those applications have updates
    > through the Secunia Software Inspector. It will identify installed applications that should
    > be updated that have not been updated and leave you "at risk".
    >
    > http://secunia.com/software_inspector
    >


    I do check my software with secunia on a regular basis.

    And I don't understand what is meant by checking your
    security software - I do a shields up check on a regular
    basis, run Nod32 and SuperAntiSpyware along with Spybot on a
    periodic basis.

    I seem to have gotten attacked because I asked a question -
    and the attack assumes I don't take responsibility for my
    own security - there is no basis that I know of for this
    assumption.

    Louise

  3. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:40:34 -0800, Richard Steinfeld wrote:

    > Sebastian G. wrote:
    >> louise wrote:
    >>
    >>> Sebastian G. wrote:
    >>>> louise wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I
    >>>>> like Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and
    >>>>> informative.
    >>>>
    >>>> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.
    >>>
    >>> What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?

    >>
    >> Google and Wikipedia exist...
    >>
    >> (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software
    >> for the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any
    >> security.)

    >
    > What the hell kind of arrogant answer was that?


    TruthWare
    --
    See Brenda's UniWorldWare
    http://tinyurl.com/nm2yt

  4. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Feb 16, 3:37 pm, louise wrote:
    > And I don't understand what is meant by checking your
    > security software - I do a shields up check on a regular
    > basis, run Nod32 and SuperAntiSpyware along with Spybot on a
    > periodic basis.
    >
    > I seem to have gotten attacked because I asked a question -
    > and the attack assumes I don't take responsibility for my
    > own security - there is no basis that I know of for this
    > assumption.


    Then why do you install all this strange security software? It does
    not take responsibility for your own security.

    Gerald

  5. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:37:27 -0500, louise
    wrote:

    >And I don't understand what is meant by checking your
    >security software


    Most users don't - which is why security software vendors can get away
    with pushing out highly questionable products of bad quality all the
    time.

    >- I do a shields up check on a regular basis


    Many do. But regarding ShieldsUp - except for the limited ability to
    quickly check if a packet filter of some kind is in place either on
    your own machine or somewhere upstream, it's a useless, hyped up
    promotion tool.

    >run Nod32 and SuperAntiSpyware along with Spybot on a
    >periodic basis.


    Due to the nature of modern malware, scanning is unreliable. What do
    you do to actually prevent bad stuff from getting in in the first
    place?

    >I seem to have gotten attacked because I asked a question -
    >and the attack assumes I don't take responsibility for my
    >own security - there is no basis that I know of for this
    >assumption.


    I don't think anyone questioned whether you take responsibility for
    your own security. Some might have indicated though, that the
    countermeasures you seem to have taken somehow shows that you may lack
    the knowledge to do so properly.

  6. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:10:23 -0600, Straight Talk
    wrote:

    > I don't think anyone questioned whether you take responsibility for
    > your own security. Some might have indicated though, that the
    > countermeasures you seem to have taken somehow shows that you may lack
    > the knowledge to do so properly.


    I wouldn't know if she does or not. It doesn't really matter as she is
    demonstrating willingness to communicate. I do see you lack communication
    skills, which loses knowledge.

    --
    Bear Bottoms
    Freeware Website http://bearware.info

  7. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    Richard Steinfeld wrote:

    > Sebastian G. wrote:
    >> louise wrote:
    >>
    >>> Sebastian G. wrote:
    >>>> louise wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I
    >>>>> like Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and
    >>>>> informative.
    >>>> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.
    >>> What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?

    >>
    >> Google and Wikipedia exist...
    >>
    >> (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software
    >> for the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any
    >> security.)

    >
    > What the hell kind of arrogant answer was that?



    Well, if we started to explain shatter attacks whenever someone asks...

    Oh, and the fact that his "security" software is full of obvious security
    vulnerabilities is just amusing.

  8. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    louise wrote:

    > I do a shields up check on a regular basis,



    Why? Except for comedian entertainment...

    > I seem to have gotten attacked because I asked a question -
    > and the attack assumes I don't take responsibility for my
    > own security - there is no basis that I know of for this
    > assumption.



    Ouch!

  9. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. wrote:

    > shatter attacks


    It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
    programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
    systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
    in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
    Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
    into any other running application or service in the same session, that
    makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
    exploit.

    --
    Bear Bottoms
    Freeware Website http://bearware.info

  10. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" wrote:
    > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. wrote:
    > > shatter attacks

    >
    > It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
    > programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
    > systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
    > in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
    > Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
    > into any other running application or service in the same session, that
    > makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
    > exploit.


    If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
    not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
    Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
    up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
    wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
    that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
    would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
    Astonishing... ;-)

    Gerald

  11. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On 16 feb, 13:06, Gerald Vogt wrote:
    > On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" wrote:
    >
    > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. wrote:
    > > > shatter attacks

    >
    > > It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
    > > programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
    > > systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
    > > in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
    > > Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
    > > into any other running application or service in the same session, that
    > > makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
    > > exploit.

    >
    > If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
    > not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
    > Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
    > up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
    > wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
    > that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
    > would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
    > Astonishing... ;-)


    This is not a library, this is usenet.
    FYI: Timbuktu is the captial of the region Timbuktu in Mali.


  12. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Feb 16, 9:53 pm, rodney.use...@gmail.com wrote:
    > On 16 feb, 13:06, Gerald Vogt wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > > On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" wrote:

    >
    > > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. wrote:
    > > > > shatter attacks

    >
    > > > It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
    > > > programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
    > > > systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
    > > > in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
    > > > Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
    > > > into any other running application or service in the same session, that
    > > > makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
    > > > exploit.

    >
    > > If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
    > > not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
    > > Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
    > > up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
    > > wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
    > > that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
    > > would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
    > > Astonishing... ;-)

    >
    > This is not a library, this is usenet.


    Correct. Google and Wikipedia are still just a click away.

    > FYI: Timbuktu is the captial of the region Timbuktu in Mali.


    I know. It is not extremely difficult to find out if you know how to
    use Google. The wikipedia article is the first hit on google. Just
    like it is the first hit for "shatter attack"...

    Gerald

  13. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 06:06:37 -0600, Gerald Vogt wrote:

    > On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" wrote:
    >> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G.
    >> wrote:
    >> > shatter attacks

    >>
    >> It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
    >> programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
    >> systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between
    >> processes
    >> in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
    >> Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be
    >> injected
    >> into any other running application or service in the same session, that
    >> makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
    >> exploit.

    >
    > If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
    > not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
    > Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
    > up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
    > wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
    > that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
    > would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
    > Astonishing... ;-)
    >
    > Gerald


    LOL...we are not in a Library, and if someone asked a question to a group
    even in a Library...you would expect everyone in the group to go look it
    up for themselves, rather than have one person easily present
    it...astonishing.

    --
    Bear Bottoms
    Freeware Website http://bearware.info

  14. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 07:00:58 -0600, Gerald Vogt wrote:


    >> This is not a library, this is usenet.

    >
    > Correct. Google and Wikipedia are still just a click away.
    >
    >> FYI: Timbuktu is the captial of the region Timbuktu in Mali.

    >
    > I know. It is not extremely difficult to find out if you know how to
    > use Google. The wikipedia article is the first hit on google. Just
    > like it is the first hit for "shatter attack"...
    >
    > Gerald


    LOL...we are not in a Library, and if someone asked a question to a group
    even in a Library...you would expect everyone in the group to go look it
    up for themselves, rather than have one person easily present
    it...astonishing.


    --
    Bear Bottoms
    Freeware Website http://bearware.info

  15. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On 16 feb, 14:00, Gerald Vogt wrote:
    > On Feb 16, 9:53 pm, rodney.use...@gmail.com wrote:
    >
    > > On 16 feb, 13:06, Gerald Vogt wrote:

    >
    > > > On Feb 16, 8:48 pm, "Bear Bottoms" wrote:

    >
    > > > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:54:48 -0600, Sebastian G. wrote:
    > > > > > shatter attacks

    >
    > > > > It is as easy as: Wikipedia:In computing, a shatter attack is a
    > > > > programming technique employed by hackers on Microsoft Windows operating
    > > > > systems that can be used to bypass security restrictions between processes
    > > > > in a session. A shatter attack takes advantage of a design flaw in
    > > > > Windows's message-passing system whereby arbitrary code could be injected
    > > > > into any other running application or service in the same session, that
    > > > > makes use of a message loop. This could result in a privilege escalation
    > > > > exploit.

    >
    > > > If you stood in a library and someone came to you (assuming you are
    > > > not a librarian) and asked you for the name of the capital of
    > > > Timbuktu, you would run and go and pick the next encyclopedia, look it
    > > > up, copy it, and give it to the person in question? You would not just
    > > > wonder whether that person was a little bit crazy or wonder whether
    > > > that person thought you were a librarian and paid for that job? You
    > > > would not tell that person that it should check a encyclopedia??
    > > > Astonishing... ;-)

    >
    > > This is not a library, this is usenet.

    >
    > Correct. Google and Wikipedia are still just a click away.


    I don't get the point. The wikipedia+google hint had been given before
    in this thread by Sebastian G. What's wrong with another person giving
    the answer ?

    > > FYI: Timbuktu is the captial of the region Timbuktu in Mali.

    >
    > I know. It is not extremely difficult to find out if you know how to
    > use Google.


    Actually the info was still stored in my brain. High school.

    > The wikipedia article is the first hit on google. Just
    > like it is the first hit for "shatter attack"...


    Yes, that's how I found out what it actually meant.
    Speaking of attacks: Microsoft is trying to make something positive
    out of worms.
    I'm already looking forward to the MS-worm-SDK

    http://technology.newscientist.com/a...are-fixes.html






  16. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:07:57 -0600, "Bear Bottoms"
    wrote:

    >On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:10:23 -0600, Straight Talk
    >wrote:
    >
    >> I don't think anyone questioned whether you take responsibility for
    >> your own security. Some might have indicated though, that the
    >> countermeasures you seem to have taken somehow shows that you may lack
    >> the knowledge to do so properly.

    >
    >I wouldn't know if she does or not. It doesn't really matter as she is
    >demonstrating willingness to communicate. I do see you lack communication
    >skills, which loses knowledge.


    Talking about communication skills... What are you trying to say?

  17. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 12:20:47 -0600, Straight Talk
    wrote:

    > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:07:57 -0600, "Bear Bottoms"
    > wrote:
    >
    >> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:10:23 -0600, Straight Talk
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>> I don't think anyone questioned whether you take responsibility for
    >>> your own security. Some might have indicated though, that the
    >>> countermeasures you seem to have taken somehow shows that you may lack
    >>> the knowledge to do so properly.

    >>
    >> I wouldn't know if she does or not. It doesn't really matter as she is
    >> demonstrating willingness to communicate. I do see you lack
    >> communication
    >> skills, which loses knowledge.

    >
    > Talking about communication skills... What are you trying to say?


    It's ok...some such as yourself are impossible to communicate with.

    --
    Bear Bottoms
    Freeware Website http://bearware.info

  18. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Feb 16, 10:09 pm, "Bear Bottoms" wrote:
    > LOL...we are not in a Library, and if someone asked a question to a group
    > even in a Library...you would expect everyone in the group to go look it
    > up for themselves, rather than have one person easily present
    > it...astonishing.


    ??? I never said that everyone nor anyone in the group should go and
    look something up which is easily available. What you want is: If
    someone asked a question in a library to a group you would expect
    everyone in the group to go look it up for themselves rather than have
    the person who asked easily look it up...

    It is the expectation of many people in forums and the usenet that if
    they have a question which could be easily answered by looking up in
    the manual, google, wikipedia or similar they expect all people in the
    group to look it up and at least a few of them present the answer.
    Some even complain if you write them "see page 10 of the manual".

    Gerald

  19. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 17:40:09 -0600, Gerald Vogt wrote:

    > On Feb 16, 10:09 pm, "Bear Bottoms" wrote:
    >> LOL...we are not in a Library, and if someone asked a question to a
    >> group
    >> even in a Library...you would expect everyone in the group to go look it
    >> up for themselves, rather than have one person easily present
    >> it...astonishing.

    >
    > ??? I never said that everyone nor anyone in the group should go and
    > look something up which is easily available. What you want is: If
    > someone asked a question in a library to a group you would expect
    > everyone in the group to go look it up for themselves rather than have
    > the person who asked easily look it up...
    >
    > It is the expectation of many people in forums and the usenet that if
    > they have a question which could be easily answered by looking up in
    > the manual, google, wikipedia or similar they expect all people in the
    > group to look it up and at least a few of them present the answer.
    > Some even complain if you write them "see page 10 of the manual".
    >
    > Gerald


    While that is a good point...it is not just about the person who asked.
    Once the question is asked, a lot of people want to know...and if someone
    does what (I'll grant you that) the op should have provided, IMO...is a
    good thing. To just bitch at the op who should have provided it, still
    leaves a gap and accomplishes very little beyond a bitch.

    --
    Bear Bottoms
    Freeware Website http://bearware.info

  20. Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

    On Feb 17, 9:46 am, "Bear Bottoms" wrote:
    > > It is the expectation of many people in forums and the usenet that if
    > > they have a question which could be easily answered by looking up in
    > > the manual, google, wikipedia or similar they expect all people in the
    > > group to look it up and at least a few of them present the answer.
    > > Some even complain if you write them "see page 10 of the manual".

    >
    > While that is a good point...it is not just about the person who asked.
    > Once the question is asked, a lot of people want to know...and if someone
    > does what (I'll grant you that) the op should have provided, IMO...is a
    > good thing. To just bitch at the op who should have provided it, still
    > leaves a gap and accomplishes very little beyond a bitch.


    Where exactly is the bitching if you tell someone that he can find the
    information easily with google or wikipedia? I agree with bitching if
    it was not easy to find with google. But if you find several extensive
    explanations of something using the verbatim topic in question
    ("shatter attack") within the first 10 hits of google and if the first
    hit is an extensive wikipedia article on the topic I don't see the
    bitching. You just enter the "shatter attack" and it is right there.
    You can even press the "I feel lucky" button of google and it takes
    you directly there.

    So I agree with you it would be some bitching if it would take
    multiple attempts to find the best search words and then some
    extensive reading because some of the hits are misleading. But in this
    case like in many similar cases I don't see the bitching if the
    information really pops up just by entering what you are looking for.
    Enter it in google and you'll find it immediately. Enter it in
    wikipedia and you'll find it immediately. That is too easy and I don't
    see the problem pointing someone into the same direction.

    Gerald

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast