Re: Online Armor Firewall?



On Dec 5, 12:28 pm, "Sebastian G." <se...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
bassbag wrote:
- buffer overflows in the kernel-mode driver due to lacking parameter
validation - runs a privileged service with 6 invisible windows,
making it vulnerable to shatter attacks

Can you provide links to this ,and also links to show that the vendor
is unwilling to fix this?

Sorry, the 30 days of disclosure time aren't over yet. At any rate, the
windows for the shatter attacks are trivial to see with Spy++.

Technically you are correct,though some folks actually use it to
discuss firewall security ,with the intention of helping other posters
me

That's doesn't make the discussion any less pointless. What use is it to
secure the windows if the door is standing open?

I wont take this discussion to far off topic I promise. i do however
have a question and a few statements.

There is no reason to debate how nonsecure or secure for that matter
any email client is. I ask anyone here what email client is
"completely" secure? For that matter the only secure computer/server/
or network that I have ever seen is the one that is turned off. Some
people might argue the point that any of the previous systems
mentioned are secureable as long as they are in a locked room with one
exit and one entry and not on the internet or connected to any other
type of public access point. After being part of this news group for
over a year now and having the chance to speak to a number of
extremely talented folks, I would bet there are quite a number of
people on this group who would be able to still steal your stuff.

So I ask why give people a hard time. If you can help then please do.
It will only make this group and those who read it stronger, more
educated people. If you cant help then why respond? Is it just so you
can flex a little muscle to give people a hard time.

Carma always wins!

..
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Any Way to Run Windows 2000 From Read-Only CD?
    ... Your point regarding infecting the computer during runtime when the disk is ... Now, regarding UNIX versus Windows, I try to have a balanced view. ... administrator can isolate those and secure them. ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.security)
  • Re: The Myth of the secure Mac
    ... >>> secure than Home. ... Though this really has nothing to do with security. ... >>> I, on the other hand, was speaking about overall Windows security, not ... I do believe that Microsoft could adjust their prices for the ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: migrating from Win2K to XP?
    ... > secure since not too many users are out there and perhaps not too many ... magically install themselves on anyone's computer. ... reliable and up-to-date antivirus software, ... Multibooting with Windows 2000 and Windows XP ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.basics)
  • Re: The Myth of the secure Mac
    ... OEM Windows XP Home goes for a bit under $100. ... >> secure than Home. ... Though this really has nothing to do with security. ... Microsoft counts on third-party developers to provide more ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)
  • Re: Privilege-escalation attacks on NT-based Windows are unfixable
    ... Whereas this is a systemic design flaw in the Windows API. ... >applications and if necessary fix them or to get Microsoft to fix the API. ... The OS does not require secure processes to open windows on the user's ... of the more naively-written services that interact with the desktop: ...
    (comp.security.misc)