__/ [ Peter Köhlmann ] on Tuesday 12 September 2006 10:04 \__
> Mathew P. wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 2006-09-12, Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>> McAfee Apologizes for Bugs in Falcon Roll Out
>>>
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>| The new software didn't work well with some ISP (Internet service
>>>| provider) software, causing browsing slow-downs for some users, the
>>>| company said. And customers who had disabled firewall protection would
>>>| be presented with notification messages that could not be ignored, an
>>>| annoyance for some.
>>
>> An annoyance? How about some education for the general public on why
>> they *must* use a firewall if they are going to *ever* have *any*
>> type of connection to the internet?
>
> Not really. A firewall should protect from gaining access from the outside
> In windows case it is supposed to also block apps from unauthorized access
> to the net, although that is a really stupid way to do
> If you run a windows box behind a NAT, the firewall would give very little,
> if any, protection to the machine, since nothing can get at it directly
> from the outside
> And a firewall is totally unable to protect against exploits on sites
> requested by browsing, for example
Firewall, much like viruses, are needed when the underlying system is flawed.
Brute force attacks to gain control, for example, are easily circumvented
when good password, as well as good encryption, is employed. See how well a
Linux server without a firewall set up can cope. DDOS attacks remain a
concern, but at least they aren't 'zombified'.
>> How many people I wonder, don't even realize what a firewall does,
>
> How should they? windows firewalls notoriously blur the vision on what a
> firewall really is. Windows users routinely get asked if "notepad.exe" or
> other typical internet software should be allowed to connect to the net
> until they blindly press "OK"
People should not realise what a firewall is or does. The firewall should
just be there doing its thing with minimal levels of intervention. _That's_
ease of use. Why should a Windows 2000 use be forced to purchase third-party
software to make up for the flaws of the system?
>> mainly because there are companies
>> like McAfee that make money on the silence.
>>
>> Annoyance? You have got to be kidding me. No wonder we have a net
>> full of zombies. People know safe sex, but they don't know safe
>> internet.
People use the Internet for sex and sex sites use Windows flaws to infect
people's machine and spread the disease. Had the system been properly
modeled, all of this wouldn't happen and people would not need 'condoms'
(firewall, AV software, UAC, annoying prompts, etc).
> There is no "safe internet" with windows
> Unless you replace the MS offerings with something better
IE7 and Vista will offer no exception to this rule either. Break up Windows
now. It's carries STD's.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Programmer: a device to convert coffee beans into code (Paul Erdos slant)
http://Schestowitz.com | Free as in Free Beer ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Cpu(s): 19.3% user, 2.7% system, 0.9% nice, 77.2% idle
http://iuron.com - semantic engine to gather information
|
|
