Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- From: "¦" <reply_in@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2006 16:11:19 -0500
One of the biggest problem with XP's built-in firewall is it lets all inside
traffic go out. MS weinered out and said that blocking outbound traffic
would be too confusing. Not.
Since XP Home doesn't really have good security like XP Pro, if you do get
infected with malware or a trojan, the built-in firewall is going to let it
send all of your passwords to the Motherland without letting you know.
A real firewall would pop up a warning that "program xxxxx is trying to
connect to the Internet." You would naturally get paranoid (rightfully so),
deny it access to the Internet and then check your computer over very
closely.
The advice about being behind a router is a great help and I do it as well.
But if malware gets installed on your computer, the NAT router is also going
to let it happily send your passwords away without warning you as well.
Ray
"John Gawe" <wegasoft@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dqvum0$i8o$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Hi there,
>
> do I really need a FW besides the one included in WInXP?
> Or:
> Can I trust the FW in WinXP?
>
> John
>
>
>
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- From: Ron Lopshire
- Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- From: Volker Birk
- Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- From: Volker Birk
- Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- From: Duane Arnold
- Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- From: K2NNJ
- Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- References:
- Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- From: John Gawe
- Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- Prev by Date: Re: Info abour speed with firewall.
- Next by Date: Re: Lose network shares after installing Checkpoint SecurClient
- Previous by thread: Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- Next by thread: Re: Do I really need a FW besides WXP
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|