Re: Linksys WRT54G and Firewall software
- From: Gerald Vogt <vogt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:43:20 +0900
3) The windows non-firewall included in XP SP2 will be more than enough,That is not conclusive: The NAT does block (most) incoming connections. The XP SP2 firewall does block all (most) incoming connections when configured with no exceptions.
but, if you take your laptop to other networks (school, work, friends) it
won't be enough in most cases.
It blocks intrusions, but what holes does it have that have not yet been
exposed? What about the next one that's found and exposes the system?
Vulnerablities which have not yet been exposed are always a problem. But you have the same problem with a NAT router, too. For the XP SP2 firewall is has been very much tested. NAT routers don't undergo that throrough tests simply because they are not used so much out there.
Plus: it is in the nature of NAT that there is a lot of guessing involved which ports to open and which not. The router must let response packets in and must figure out where to send it. Thus, if you use a packet sniffer or use some logging functions on the computer you'll see that some unsolicited packets occassionally get through.
Where is the difference which explains why something else then the XP SP2 FW is needed elsewhere?
The NAT router is the better first line of defense when it can be used,
The XP SP2 FW with no exceptions on a computer directly connected to the internet is protecting the computer better than a NAT router. NAT does not provide the protection like a properly setup packet filter.
but, as the OP mentions wireless, well, you can't NAT a wireless
connection - what I mean is that the wireless connection is from the
router to the laptop, there is no intermediate NAT between the wireless
and the laptop - so, anything that makes it to the wireless also makes it
to the laptop unless it's got some form of localized firewall.
That does not explain why the computer would need another (different) firewall from the XP SP2 FW when it is connected to other networks.
4) If you use your laptop on OTHER networks you really need to learn howAgain contradictory to 3): if you think you need something else than the XP SP2 firewall in other networks and you are running a other brand "non-firewall" software then the recommendation should be to check that the XP SP2 firewall is turned off and the 3rd party "non-firewall" is on. Two or more firewalls running on a computer result on average in less security then a single one as it is unpredicted what actually is blocked and what not and by which firewall which will jeopardize the consistency of and state table in any firewall (as they are generally stateful).
to check the Windows TCP/IP Settings, disable File/Printer sharing when
you are not home, and how to adjust/check the Windows XP SP2 non-firewall
settings for "Exceptions".
I never mentioned another firewall application, not a single one, not even
suggesting it. Stop playing the old/tired mantra.
Well you wrote: "The windows non-firewall included in XP SP2 will be more than enough, but, if you take your laptop to other networks school, work, friends) it won't be enough in most cases.". If it is not a 3rd party firmware then what else do you need? You don't explain it. I have guess you have thought of a 3rd party firmware. If it is not, then you really have to explain what would fill the "not enough" if the computer is in other networks.
5) More important than a firewall, when behind a NAT router, is theMost important to keep your system up-to-date and reduce the number of software on your computer. The less software you are running the less is vulnerable. The less software the less you have to check for updates manually if it does not come with automatic updates. Subscribe to some good security notification lists like the one from Microsoft or US-Cert. Then you get timely notification of updates and you can update very quickly.
Antivirus software and your security methods - like not running as an
Administrator (best to run as a limited user), installing Fire Fox, not
using Outlook Express or Outlook if you use POP3 for email....
If you do all this you are very likely that your AntiVirus will never ever report anything relevant and thus will prove itself superfluous.
So you mean that if you access email, through POP3, that you don't need
antivirus? So, you mean that if you download via FTP or other, since the
net has more than just MS and Cert, that you don't really need AV?
I access my e-mails through pop3 and imap. I don't need antivirus. Why should I need antivirus? For what? The antivirus usually does not show any useful messages. All the antivirus potentially did was damaging my mail folders when the mail program downloaded an old blaster from my pop3 box and annoyed me with some 20 virus access warnings (which I had to allow each time) until I was able to delete the virus e-mail from my Inbox and emptied the trash. The computer was at no time at any danger still the antivirus will give you a hard time to do what you are supposed to do with an virus e-mail: DELETE.
And what should I donwload via FTP for which I need an antivirus? Can you be more specific?
Come one, AV is mandatory, even as a limited user, for anyone running an
OS that can be exploited by malware.
No. I don't have AV nor FW. I run as limited user. I don't know why it should be mandatory. As there is no 100% security anything can potentially be exploited by malware. But the best protection against malware is still me. As I am better than some AV which well slows down my computer it is a easy choice for me.
- Prev by Date: Re: Linksys WRT54G and Firewall software
- Next by Date: Re: Linksys WRT54G and Firewall software
- Previous by thread: Re: Linksys WRT54G and Firewall software
- Next by thread: Re: Linksys WRT54G and Firewall software