Windows Firewall enough??

---
Leonard Grey
Errare humanum est

Thanks for your help, Leonard!

Mark

In article , kayhkay-nospam-
@operamail.com says...
The windows firewall deals with inbound protection and therefore does not
give you a false sense of security. Best of all, it doesn't implement lots
of nonsense like pretending that outbound traffic needs to be monitored.

Activate and utilize the Win XP built-in Firewall; Uncheck *all* Programs
and Services under the Exception tab.


Like I mentioned in another group, unless you monitor the "Exceptions"
on a routine basis you are likely to find ones added that you were
unaware of.

The Flaw in Windows XP Firewall is that APPLICATIONS can add exceptions
without the user being aware of them.

While I'm not suggesting that users disable it or switch to a different
one, a simple NAT router provides a better protection barrier to the
internet than does the Windows Firewall alone.

--
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(remove 999 for proper email address)

While I'm not suggesting that users disable it or switch to a different
one, a simple NAT router provides a better protection barrier to the
internet than does the Windows Firewall alone.

I copied this from an earlier post in this thread. Can you tell me if
this is the kind of router (NAT) that I should have, please?

I am not as knowledgeable as many of you, but I do have a wireless
router, but I have the "wireless" turned off and it is "wired." What I
have is the D-Link D_-524
(http://reviews.cnet.com/routers/d-li...-30839580.html)
I have had it for a few years. Please look at the above link at the
pros and cons. It says the DI-624 is better and faster. Should I
replace this or is there a better one to have or is what I have good
enough?
--------

Thanks,
Mark

On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:42:45 -0500, Leythos wrote:

Snip, snip, snip, snip, snip...

On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:47:29 -0600, FERRANTE wrote:


While I'm not suggesting that users disable it or switch to a different
one, a simple NAT router provides a better protection barrier to the
internet than does the Windows Firewall alone.

I copied this from an earlier post in this thread. Can you tell me if
this is the kind of router (NAT) that I should have, please?

I am not as knowledgeable as many of you, but I do have a wireless
router, but I have the "wireless" turned off and it is "wired." What I
have is the D-Link D_-524
(http://reviews.cnet.com/routers/d-li...-30839580.html)
I have had it for a few years. Please look at the above link at the
pros and cons. It says the DI-624 is better and faster. Should I
replace this or is there a better one to have or is what I have good
enough?

Good enough!

Setup Wizard for: D-Link D_-524
http://support.dlink.com/emulators/di524/h_wizard.html

How To Secure a D-Link DI-524 Router
http://www.howtodothings.com/compute...-di-524-router

In article ,
says...


While I'm not suggesting that users disable it or switch to a different
one, a simple NAT router provides a better protection barrier to the
internet than does the Windows Firewall alone.

I copied this from an earlier post in this thread. Can you tell me if
this is the kind of router (NAT) that I should have, please?

I am not as knowledgeable as many of you, but I do have a wireless
router, but I have the "wireless" turned off and it is "wired." What I
have is the D-Link D_-524
(http://reviews.cnet.com/routers/d-li...-30839580.html)
I have had it for a few years. Please look at the above link at the
pros and cons. It says the DI-624 is better and faster. Should I
replace this or is there a better one to have or is what I have good
enough?

Any of them offers the minimal protection you should have.

If you want one that provides OUTBOUND rules/limiting, then you need to
look at their specific interfaces. Most of them allow you to block SOME
outbound, but the key feature is LOGGING.

There is a free utility, can't remember the name, that provides REAL-
TIME display of in/out traffic and it works very nicely on Linksys
routers, easy to read, but not all routers provide the same logging
functions or details.

--
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(remove 999 for proper email address)

In article , kayhkay-
says...
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009 06:42:45 -0500, Leythos wrote:

Snip, snip, snip, snip, snip...

If you're going to SNIP the entire post then why quote any of it?

--
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(remove 999 for proper email address)

"Leythos" wrote in message
om...
In article ,
says...


While I'm not suggesting that users disable it or switch to a different
one, a simple NAT router provides a better protection barrier to the
internet than does the Windows Firewall alone.

I copied this from an earlier post in this thread. Can you tell me if
this is the kind of router (NAT) that I should have, please?

I am not as knowledgeable as many of you, but I do have a wireless
router, but I have the "wireless" turned off and it is "wired." What I
have is the D-Link D_-524
(http://reviews.cnet.com/routers/d-li...-30839580.html)
I have had it for a few years. Please look at the above link at the
pros and cons. It says the DI-624 is better and faster. Should I
replace this or is there a better one to have or is what I have good
enough?

Any of them offers the minimal protection you should have.

If you want one that provides OUTBOUND rules/limiting, then you need to
look at their specific interfaces. Most of them allow you to block SOME
outbound, but the key feature is LOGGING.

There is a free utility, can't remember the name, that provides REAL-
TIME display of in/out traffic and it works very nicely on Linksys
routers, easy to read, but not all routers provide the same logging
functions or details.

I use NetMeter, freeware, which I find very useful to keep track
of upload/downloads. HTH,

Jim.

In article , says...
There is a free utility, can't remember the name, that provides REAL-
TIME display of in/out traffic and it works very nicely on Linksys
routers, easy to read, but not all routers provide the same logging
functions or details.

I use NetMeter, freeware, which I find very useful to keep track
of upload/downloads. HTH,


I think the one I was trying to remember the name of is "WallWatcher"
and was free, not sure of it is, but it seemed to work very well with
Linksys NAT routers.

--
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(remove 999 for proper email address)

"Leythos" wrote in message
om...
In article , says...
There is a free utility, can't remember the name, that provides REAL-
TIME display of in/out traffic and it works very nicely on Linksys
routers, easy to read, but not all routers provide the same logging
functions or details.

I use NetMeter, freeware, which I find very useful to keep track
of upload/downloads. HTH,


I think the one I was trying to remember the name of is "WallWatcher"
and was free, not sure of it is, but it seemed to work very well with
Linksys NAT routers.

--
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(remove 999 for proper email address)

Thanks for posting back with that name; I was lurking and wondering what the
tool was. Looked it up on the Web (www.wallwatcher.com) and it looks great.
The pricing/licensing structure is intriguingly novel:

"WallWatcher is Shareware, not "Freeware"; but the current price is $0.00.
If the price changes in the future, it will not be retroactive and will not
affect whatever version you've been using."

"Jerry" wrote in message
...
Zone Alarm is one of the best


Zone Alarm takes an eternity to start up and configure itself. It used to
be highly regarded but has become a bucket of bolts since Gibson sold the
product.

"FERRANTE" wrote in message
...
Is there really a need for an additional firewall besides the one that
comes with windows? If so, of the free ones, which do most consider as
a very good one?

Thanks,
Mark

"FERRANTE" wrote in message
...
Is there really a need for an additional firewall besides the one that
comes with windows? If so, of the free ones, which do most consider as
a very good one?


The Windows firewall will hide your PC from unwanted attention as well as
any paid for or free firewall. If you want the additional reassurance of
outbound protection (that is: alerting you whenever some utility attempts to
access the internet) then a third party firewall is required. Komodo comes
highly recommended, though I don't use it myself. I have no had any
problems with unwanted net access.

In article ,
says...

"FERRANTE" wrote in message
...
Is there really a need for an additional firewall besides the one that
comes with windows? If so, of the free ones, which do most consider as
a very good one?


The Windows firewall will hide your PC from unwanted attention as well as
any paid for or free firewall. If you want the additional reassurance of
outbound protection (that is: alerting you whenever some utility attempts to
access the internet) then a third party firewall is required. Komodo comes
highly recommended, though I don't use it myself. I have no had any
problems with unwanted net access.

That's not completely true.

Windows firewall, as we've seen thousands of times, allows applications
as well as stupid users to punch holes through it, often without the
user having a clue.

Windows firewall does not block outbound connections, allowing all
malware to phone home without restriction - provided it does phone home,
as not all phones home.

Windows firewall does not protect you from File/Printer sharing access
if it's enabled.

--
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(remove 999 for proper email address)

M.I.5¾ wrote:
"FERRANTE" wrote in message
...
Is there really a need for an additional firewall besides the one that
comes with windows? If so, of the free ones, which do most consider as
a very good one?


The Windows firewall will hide your PC from unwanted attention as well as
any paid for or free firewall. If you want the additional reassurance of
outbound protection (that is: alerting you whenever some utility attempts
to
access the internet) then a third party firewall is required. Komodo
comes
highly recommended, though I don't use it myself. I have no had any
problems with unwanted net access.

If one uses a download manager to download something, or uses a P2P app for
music, do these applications need to be added as exceptions in Windows
Firewall? I never was sure exactly what needs to be added as an exception.

I thought the idea was that if *anything* tries to come into your computer,
even if YOU initiate it (a download), it would be flagged, but that doesn't
always seem to be the case.

In article ,
says...
M.I.5? wrote:
"FERRANTE" wrote in message
...
Is there really a need for an additional firewall besides the one that
comes with windows? If so, of the free ones, which do most consider as
a very good one?


The Windows firewall will hide your PC from unwanted attention as well as
any paid for or free firewall. If you want the additional reassurance of
outbound protection (that is: alerting you whenever some utility attempts
to
access the internet) then a third party firewall is required. Komodo
comes
highly recommended, though I don't use it myself. I have no had any
problems with unwanted net access.

If one uses a download manager to download something, or uses a P2P app for
music, do these applications need to be added as exceptions in Windows
Firewall? I never was sure exactly what needs to be added as an exception.

I thought the idea was that if *anything* tries to come into your computer,
even if YOU initiate it (a download), it would be flagged, but that doesn't
always seem to be the case.

Many P2P apps will add holes to the windows firewall because they expect
you to SHARE your downloads with others, some ask for your permission,
others don't ask. Some will not work or will give limited speed if you
don't share your downloads.

Many P2P apps include backdoors that also expose your computer to many
other threats.

Windows firewall is not a good protection tool for people that don't
constantly monitor their exceptions and that use file sharing apps, in
general.


--
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(remove 999 for proper email address)