Re: Bypassed software firewall?

In article <MPG.1d3b47e54b81a0119899b2@news-server.columbus.rr.com>,
void@nowhere.lan says...
> In article <3jbehgFp70g6U1@individual.net>, webworm11@lycos.com says...
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > I do disagree about software firewalls. Remember the Blaster Virus.
> > I didn't have the update installed. The software outpost firewall
> > 1.0 keep me from getting this virus.
> >
> > Since, I had the ghost backup. I disabled my firewall and got the
> > virus right away.
>
> And you were luck that you had not forwarded ports inbound related to
> the virus or your PFW would not have protected you before.
>
> Everyone knows that a PFW in the proper hands is a good thing, but, look
> at it this way, since the people that know how to maintain a PFW are not
> the ones being compromised, how does a typical home user know what to do
> with the PFW alerts and rules? Answer, they don't, they just keep adding
> exceptions and that compromises the integrity of their solution.
>
> A cheap NAT device doesn't expose them to that type of problem - you can
> even get NAT dial-up devices.
>
> --
>
Please recommend a good, inexpensive NAT dial-up device. My son has
been looking for one for me. He found one for about 80 bucks, but it only
had dial-up capability as backup for it's normal wideband
service. I am running Win98, Sygate Pro (which I have been comfortable
with for 4-yrs.) and a dialup modem.
Thank you,
Casey
Received on Thu Sep 29 19:58:26 2005