Re: false portscan alarm
- From: "GEO" Me@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 03:32:35 GMT
On Thu, 19 Oct 2006 14:46:49 -0500, ibuprofin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Moe Trin) wrote:
I use Windows 3.1, it does not even know what is this Messenger thing.
Sweet Mother Of... well, at least it was the most network secure version
of windoze out of the box. What _are_ you using instead, Trumpet Winsock?
Trumpet Winsock version 2.0 revision B. It looked as if version 3
might stop working after 30 days, so I kept version 2.0.
Under 'Trace' it has some options that give me an idea of what is
involved in the communication. Peter Tattam wrote a nice little
program.
Updates? What's that?
You have a point there. If I recall correctly, the only updates were
incorporated quietly into the releases. I don't off hand even remember
back-ports or updates to existing installations. But then, how would you
even obtain them? Dial in with Windoze Terminal to your favorite BBS?
Since Windows 3.1 did not try so hard to be everything to everybody
it did not include so many programs, and I guess it was designed with
a single, isolated, user in mind.
Terminal? There is a very nice program called Procomm Plus version
2.1 for Windows 3.1. I know there is a version for Windows 95, and I
believe it even had a DOS version.
Geo
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Moe Trin
- Re: false portscan alarm
- References:
- false portscan alarm
- From: mikahan
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Bit Twister
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Spack
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: GEO
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Spack
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: GEO
- Re: false portscan alarm
- From: Moe Trin
- false portscan alarm
- Prev by Date: Re: Filter Internet NAT Redirection
- Next by Date: changing ZA firewall & modem NAT settings
- Previous by thread: Re: false portscan alarm
- Next by thread: Re: false portscan alarm
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|