Re: messenger service pop ups

From: Karl Levinson [x y] mvp (jamescagney90210@excite.com)
Date: 11/17/02 

From: "Karl Levinson [x y] mvp" <jamescagney90210@excite.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2002 16:22:33 -0500

Well, you're right, but I would argue that it's not the firewall but the
user wanting to use his computer as a server that increased the support
burden.

The number one uses for incoming traffic to a home computer would probably
be to host a web server on the home computer or a peer to peer file sharing
software. If someone is expecting to do either of these things, they should
be expected to know a little bit more than the person that just uses his
computer for word processing and web browsing... specifically, they should
know how to administer and secure their PC in some way.

Running a web server or file sharing software is a big security risk waiting
to happen. I don't think it's correct to conclude that, "well, it's too
much trouble to configure Zone Alarm, so I'm going to run my web server with
no security."

Someone that wants to run a web server but doesn't know how to configure
Zone Alarm is going to have problems no matter how we try to help them,
whether or not we try to raise the bar a little. All we can do is put
accurate and complete information out there and let them take responsibility
for it. Once we start giving everyone incomplete and insecure solutions to
100% of the people just because 90% of the people can't deal with it, the
responsibility for computers being insecurely configured starts shifting
from them to us here in the newsgroup. Personally, I feel obligated to
provide at least links to further, complete information, for the benefit of
those 5% to 10% of the people who might actually use it.

"Bill Sanderson" <Bill_Sanderson@msn.com.plugh.org> wrote in message
news:uaNPCFnjCHA.2840@tkmsftngp11...
> Not to disagree, but the downside to software firewalls is mysterious
> non-functionality of things you think should work--incoming access, for
> example, because you asked for advice, didn't mention the firewall, and
the
> advice-giver didn't think to query about the firewall either. Basically,
I
> think software firewalls except for XP's internal one tend to up the
support
> burden, judging from posts in network_web and work_remotely--the need to
> configure or affirm outgoing access for things, the older versions not
> working well on OS upgrades--lots of relatively minor problems, but ones
> which need intervention, even if it's just a newsgroup thread.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Moving webserver inside firewall
    ... current OS/Product Service Packs, security patches, security tools, virus ... | I think inside the firewall is the best place for most any server. ... | The only way to be 100% sure the web server is not compromised is to ...
    (microsoft.public.inetserver.iis.security)
  • Re: some external domains not resolving
    ... Thanks - I'm upgrading the firewall this week so hopefully that will clear ... www.tnchamber.org which means they are both sites on the same web server. ... I believe I have our DNS server configured correctly - forwarders are ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.dns)
  • Re: DMZ - Network topology
    ... > I was then planning on making rules in the firewall limiting how the web ... > server could talk to the database server on the LAN. ... > The imperative security issue is the LAN, the web server can be trashed ... I personally think it is a big mistake to put any computer on the internet ...
    (microsoft.public.inetserver.iis.security)
  • IPChains bug or DoS?
    ... The server is located behind a Linux firewall running IPChains. ... There's one port open on the firewall ... the web server and the client are having a normal ...
    (comp.os.linux.security)
  • Re: NT 4 server firewall?
    ... >> Who makes software firewalls for Windows NT 4 Server? ... >> there any quality freeware server firewall products for NT 4? ... I am the systems admin. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)