Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Computer Learning -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Magnatizer who wrote (18200)	3/30/2001 3:43:30 PM
From: mr.mark	Respond to of 110652

mag "anyone giving freedom a test ride yet?" not i. i'm kinda' firewall intensive at the moment. i'd love to know more about it, though. i'd love to hear if anyone here has tried freedom. related article from pcworld.com, though freedom is not on their list.... Is Your PC Safe From the Enemy Within? Does your firewall have a hole in it? New updates fix a potentially disastrous flaw. Cameron Crouch and Seán Captain From the April 2001 issue of PC World magazine pcworld.com :) mark

To: Magnatizer who wrote (18200)	3/30/2001 7:28:59 PM
From: thecow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110652

mag I gave Freedom two brief tries and came away disappointed. The ad blocking was too difficult to use. To block an ad that is not already on Freedom's block list you have to find the url of the ad by viewing the html source page and copy and paste into freedom. A couple of days later, being my normal hardheaded self, I thought I'd give it another try. Much to my surprise when I reinstalled I didn't have to configure anything. Even though I had uninstalled according to their instructions I obviously didn't get a complete uninstallation. All the personal data and preferences had been left behind. I decided to test Freedom at GRC.com and it failed the Probe Ports test and I uninstalled it. ZoneAlarm shows complete stealth on the same test. Here's the info. "Why isn't my Port 113 Stealthed? I'm using a firewall to stealth my entire machine, but the ShieldsUP! port probe shows port 113 to only be closed instead of stealthed! What gives? Port 113 is associated with the Internet's Ident/Auth (Identification / Authentication) service. When a client program in your computer contacts a remote server for services such as POP, IMAP, SMTP, or IRC, that remote server sends back a query to the "Ident" server running in many systems listening for these queries on port 113. Essentially, the remote server is asking your system to identify itself . . . and you. This means that port 113 is often probed by attackers as a rich source of your personal information. You may recall, from my explanation of Stealthed ports, that attempting to connect to a stealthed port is both costly and painful for the contact initiator — which is why it's so cool to stealth our machines. But the problem with simple stealthing of port 113 is that we don't want to hurt the servers we are trying to contact when they turn around and send us their IDENT query. If they get no response at all from their port 113 query, our connection to them (which initiated their query in the first place) will be delayed or perhaps completely abandoned. Note that not all servers generate IDENT queries. So, depending upon your ISP, stealthing port 113 may not be any problem for you. However, you'll note that requirements for port 113 are common enough that most mature firewalls (BlackICE Defender, AtGuard, NIS2K, etc.) include built-in default rules allowing IDENT queries to pass through. These rules result in the IDENT's status being "closed" rather than "stealth." So what can you do? You may be able to remove or disable your firewall's default rule for IDENT (port 113) and run it in full stealth mode without trouble. If you do this, keep on the lookout for trouble connecting to less common servers, like IRC, which might have problems that you haven't encountered before. Or, you can leave the default rule in place and live with your system's IDENT service port being visible to the outside world. Be aware that this provides a means for intruders to detect an otherwise stealthed computer. And they'll know you're running a firewall since other things are stealthed, but not port 113. Or, you can switch to the very latest, highest technology, and best adaptive firewall which is smart enough to stealth this port against random probes, while still showing it as "closed" to queries from valid servers . . . My current favorite firewall is the completely free ZoneAlarm 2.0 (ZA2) from ZoneLabs. ZoneAlarm is the only firewall I know of that's smart enough to stealth your ENTIRE machine while still allowing your remote servers to see port 113 as closed. (ZA2 is still being "birthed" and many bugs are still being worked out. But once the product settles down I believe it's going to be THE firewall of choice!) " Edit in: Gibson also like Tiny Personal Firewall