|
pc
newsgroups
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Firewall
the firewall enabled, does that mean that I can safely turn off and keep off my WinXP SP2 firewall? 1313 <1*@13.com> wrote:
> I have a Netgear 54 Mbps Wireless ADSL Firewall Router. If this already No. The hardware router will protect you from attacks from the internet,> has the firewall enabled, does that mean that I can safely turn off and > keep off my WinXP SP2 firewall? but not someone who might connect on your side of the wireless router. The hardware routers also don't stop anything outbound. The SP2 firewall does. -- --- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5 d***@XReXXFirew.usenet.us.com wrote in news:d1a72j$e2t$5@blue.rahul.net: When did the XP FW have the ability to stop outbound traffic on lets say > 1313 <1*@13.com> wrote: >> I have a Netgear 54 Mbps Wireless ADSL Firewall Router. If this >> already has the firewall enabled, does that mean that I can safely >> turn off and keep off my WinXP SP2 firewall? > > No. The hardware router will protect you from attacks from the > internet, but not someone who might connect on your side of the > wireless router. The hardware routers also don't stop anything > outbound. The SP2 firewall does. > port 100, stop outbound to a remote IP, stop outbound by protocol or stop all outbound period? I don't think it can do it. It's got as much ability to stop outbound as the (no FW) NAT router. Duane :) Duane Arnold <no***@notme.com> wrote:
> When did the XP FW have the ability to stop outbound traffic on lets say Darn. Altogether confused. unpost...unpost.> port 100, stop outbound to a remote IP, stop outbound by protocol or stop > all outbound period? I don't think it can do it. It's got as much ability > to stop outbound as the (no FW) NAT router. I thought it did. I thought I saw it. I don't know what I was remembering. It's still valid to keep a firewall on any computer that is wireless, for attacks that occur on "your" side of the NAT router. -- --- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5
Show quote
Hide quote
d***@XReXXFirew.usenet.us.com wrote in news:d1as9a$tom$1@blue.rahul.net: Oh well, you can use this to supplement the NAT router or XP FW and it can > Duane Arnold <no***@notme.com> wrote: >> When did the XP FW have the ability to stop outbound traffic on lets >> say port 100, stop outbound to a remote IP, stop outbound by >> protocol or stop all outbound period? I don't think it can do it. >> It's got as much ability to stop outbound as the (no FW) NAT router. > > Darn. Altogether confused. unpost...unpost. > I thought it did. I thought I saw it. I don't know what I was > remembering. > > It's still valid to keep a firewall on any computer that is wireless, > for attacks that occur on "your" side of the NAT router. > stop inbound or outbound by port, protocol, IP, subnet or Domain Name. http://www.petri.co.il/block_ping_traffic_with_ipsec.htm http://www.analogx.com/contents/articles/ipsec.htm Duane :) Duane Arnold <no***@notme.com> wrote in
news:Xns961BBBF16FCA4notmenotmecom@204.127.199.17: Actually it does prompt you when an unknown application tries to make an > When did the XP FW have the ability to stop outbound traffic on lets > say port 100, stop outbound to a remote IP, stop outbound by > protocol or stop all outbound period? I don't think it can do it. It's > got as much ability to stop outbound as the (no FW) NAT router. outbound connection. -- Lucas Tam (REMOVEn***@rogers.com) Please delete "REMOVE" from the e-mail address when replying. http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/coolspot18/ Lucas Tam <REMOVEn***@rogers.com> wrote in
news:Xns961BF0EF6835Enntprogerscom@127.0.0.1: That is called Application Control in a personal FW solution and is by no > Duane Arnold <no***@notme.com> wrote in > news:Xns961BBBF16FCA4notmenotmecom@204.127.199.17: > >> When did the XP FW have the ability to stop outbound traffic on lets >> say port 100, stop outbound to a remote IP, stop outbound by >> protocol or stop all outbound period? I don't think it can do it. It's >> got as much ability to stop outbound as the (no FW) NAT router. > > Actually it does prompt you when an unknown application tries to make an > outbound connection. means the measure of a FW's ability to stop outbound traffic by port, protocol, or IP etc, etc. And in the traditional sense of what a FW or network FW is suppose to do, the XP FW has no means of stopping outbound traffic. Some people don't even consider a PFW to be a FW. Duane :) Lucas Tam <REMOVEn***@rogers.com> wrote:
> Actually it does prompt you when an unknown application tries to make an That's what I remembered, but I can't recreate it, and I don't see any way> outbound connection. to control a program. -- --- Clarence A Dold - Hidden Valley (Lake County) CA USA 38.8,-122.5 At 22:05:23 on 16/03/2005, d***@XReXXFirew.usenet.us.com delighted alt.internet.wireless by announcing:
> 1313 <1*@13.com> wrote: You missed out "by default."> > I have a Netgear 54 Mbps Wireless ADSL Firewall Router. If this already > > has the firewall enabled, does that mean that I can safely turn off and > > keep off my WinXP SP2 firewall? > > No. The hardware router will protect you from attacks from the internet, > but not someone who might connect on your side of the wireless router. The > hardware routers also don't stop anything outbound
Show quote
Hide quote
On 4 Apr 2005 10:26:27 GMT, "Alex" <no.spam@mail.com> wrote: A hardware firewall can't differentiate between Port 80 traffic from>At 22:05:23 on 16/03/2005, d***@XReXXFirew.usenet.us.com delighted alt.internet.wireless by announcing: > >> 1313 <1*@13.com> wrote: >> > I have a Netgear 54 Mbps Wireless ADSL Firewall Router. If this already >> > has the firewall enabled, does that mean that I can safely turn off and >> > keep off my WinXP SP2 firewall? >> >> No. The hardware router will protect you from attacks from the internet, >> but not someone who might connect on your side of the wireless router. The >> hardware routers also don't stop anything outbound > >You missed out "by default." your browser and Port 80 traffic from a hijack program. I prefer to have both a hardware and a software firewall (not windoze). -- AnthonyL 
Other interesting topics
Wireless and IE won't mix
router and access point DLINK 2100AP extreme G Netgear DG834G; extending range with ANT2405 Problems using Edimax WLAN 5-in-1 as a bridge billing system for wlan Non-IP broadcast Cisco Aironet 1200 problem Netgear ME102 access point as wireless adapter Multicast not working over WiFi? 802.11g vs. 802.11i |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
