Re: Tutorial for Kerio 2.1.5 ?
From: Alan Illeman (illemann_at_surfbest.net)
Date: 05/17/04
- Next message: John: "Re: REVIEW: "Network Security Essentials", William Stallings"
- Previous message: God Rudy: "Re: Windows vulnerability vs Linux vulnerability [Re: Would a firewall"
- In reply to: Nick H: "Re: Tutorial for Kerio 2.1.5 ?"
- Next in thread: Jackeline D: "Re: Tutorial for Kerio 2.1.5 ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 13:26:32 -0400
"Nick H" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:pNRpc.544$eP6.197@newsfe1-gui.server.ntli.net...
[snip]
>>V2.1.5, which I run, is well regarded. V4.x.x is slated as still being
>>very buggy.
I appeared on this scene only a few months ago (upgraded to Win2K
from Win95) and purchased KPF4, only to find out later that KPF2.1.5
is a far superior product.
> KPF needs a bit more
> understanding but it is much more powerful (that is ZA Free vs KPF
> Free). If Jackeline is concerned about which programs are allowed to
> dial out, a router is not going to help. I run WinME, but in WinXP,
> should svchost.exe be allowed to dial out? If so, should it be
> restricted to certain servers or ports for its time synchronisation
> function, or is it safe to give it unrestricted access (probably not).
It's ok for svchost to listen (UDP), it will whether you set a rule or not,
but you have to set a rule that denies any TCP input to svchost. Also set
similiar rules for SYSTEM
and MSTASK.
- Next message: John: "Re: REVIEW: "Network Security Essentials", William Stallings"
- Previous message: God Rudy: "Re: Windows vulnerability vs Linux vulnerability [Re: Would a firewall"
- In reply to: Nick H: "Re: Tutorial for Kerio 2.1.5 ?"
- Next in thread: Jackeline D: "Re: Tutorial for Kerio 2.1.5 ?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
