Printable View
So, who all has played around with the built-in firewall for XP Service Pack 2? I’ve played with it a bit and it seems pretty good, unless there is some unknown exploit for the built in firewall is there any reason to go with a different free solution (for XP that is) like Zone Alarms?
It's not an alternative for a third-party software firewall, since there is no outgoing connection control.
I like that it's on by default, though. For some weird reason, Remote Assistance is enabled by default through the Exceptions Tab.
The logging options are pretty decent (log dropped packets, log succesful connections).
If it's true that it doesn't allow program control, how is it any better than the one that's built into XP right now? :confused: (Honest question.)
Regards,
James
At least it has more options than "off" and "on" :)
It does allow program control, but only incoming. You can select the programs to allow, you can select the port/service,...
Read these:Quote:
If it's true that it doesn't allow program control, how is it any better than the one that's built into XP right now?
http://download.microsoft.com/downl...ite%20paper.doc
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/preinstall.mspx
http://www.windowsnetworking.com/ar...res_Review.html
Irongeek, I remember you form HDC how much are you pushing now in terms of free weights?Quote:
Originally posted here by Irongeek
So, who all has played around with the built-in firewall for XP Service Pack 2? I’ve played with it a bit and it seems pretty good, unless there is some unknown exploit for the built in firewall is there any reason to go with a different free solution (for XP that is) like Zone Alarms?
It is a shame that Microsoft is under so much pressure to sink its system to the level of the lowest common denominator. Firewalls on by default? More secure configuration by default? Because thousands os System Admins are too stupid and lazy to read the damned TFM? Very, very sad.
:echo:
Damn, do we have some other jocks in here? Lets hear some numbers! Post or PM....Quote:
Irongeek, I remember you form HDC how much are you pushing now in terms of free weights?
As for the firewall, I would rather have my program control, and AFAIK the new xp one doesn't do that? Helps prevent malware.
Through my dealings with it, I'd say the firewall was fairly decent to start you off with. Turn it on when you first install XP and leave it on until you download a better, more effiecient firewall (such as OutPost, Sygate, Kerio, etc).
Most people (probably 99%) who use windows have little or no computer knowledge and therefore windows should have a default secure install , for everyones sake.Quote:
Originally posted here by !mitationRust
Irongeek, I remember you form HDC how much are you pushing now in terms of free weights?
It is a shame that Microsoft is under so much pressure to sink its system to the level of the lowest common denominator. Firewalls on by default? More secure configuration by default? Because thousands os System Admins are too stupid and lazy to read the damned TFM? Very, very sad.
:echo:
However, many of those people who don't know anything about computers also use XP HOME -- which in the past already had many of the networking features turned off, I think that because of these types of users are the majority Microsoft had to move to protect them (which in turn does create some headaches for sysadmins when sp2 autoinstalls and breaks stuff)
while XP Firewall doesn't block outgoing programs automatically, it does prompt you whether or not to block/unblock a program -- does this mean it can communicate out but not listen for incoming communication (that is not initated by the program)??
I agree that for the world in general more secure out of the box is good, but I am not sure I like that being forced on me. ;)Quote:
Originally posted here by lumpyporridge
Most people (probably 99%) who use windows have little or no computer knowledge and therefore windows should have a default secure install , for everyones sake.
Better forced on people who know what they are doing than leaving the people who don't have a minuet clue with their fingers in their bums. :)
I have a little different take on how I evaluate the builtin firewall for XP, that is configurability. I DL lots of anime, so I use bit torrent and I open up ports 6881-6999. You know how much it would suck to do this using the builtin firewall? Immensely. You can only add one new service/port at a time thru the GUI, which as far as I can tell is the only way to configure the builtin firewall. So you would have to open 6999-6881 + 1 ports separately with the GUI. I like quick solutions so I thought maybe I could write a batch file, but to no avail. The progam itself that is responsible for the firewall is called svchost.exe, and it is also responsible for 3 other programs (at least) that need to be running all the time. Trying to find out command line parameters for svchost was a chore, and even when I did none of them pertained to the firewall. If one had a good enough book, for pedagogical purposes, and enough experience programming they could probably write a firewall program quicker than they could open all those ports on the builtin firewall.
Bottom line is, its not very configurable, but it serves for most purposes e.g. telnet, SMTP.
Also I echo the distress about more secure out of the box being forced on me.
OK.... Your either in the group, (99%), that doesn't get it, or the 1% that does.....Quote:
I agree that for the world in general more secure out of the box is good, but I am not sure I like that being forced on me.
The 99% that don't have never, will never and certainly didn't install their OS. So even a question at install asking "Do you want to turn on the firewall" would be a tad wasted since none of them would ever see it.
One might also suggest that if you are in the 1% then turning it off should be no more of a chore than turning it on and certainly less of a chore than installing a 3rd party. If you say "corporate environment" you should probably using an image anyway.... ;)
Side benefit - Your firewall/IDS logs will be easier to read - less crap from unprotected machines sonce the 99% won't even know it's on let alone know how to turn it off for no reason..... :D
It’s funny because 99.9% of people that I talk to in person about computer security on the rare occasion that I do, and the funny thing about it is that most of these people have some type of degree in that field. They usually are already squawking about what they run on ect… blah blah blah I almost always ask them if they use the Run As feature again 90% have no clue and I’m thinking to myself,( I never switched over to the admin account the whole 9 months since the install) and they tell me that the network at my home is insecure. Why? Because I have no firewall or virus protection. It seems like all their knowledge of security has come from reading the back of assorted Norton boxes. ;)
Sorry for the tangent.
Open up a prompt and type in tasklist /svc <--- give you list of what is using svchost ...... at any given time.Quote:
[i] Originally posted The progam itself that is responsible for the firewall is called svchost.exe, and it is also responsible for 3 other programs (at least) that need to be running all the time. [/B]
XP SP2 is adequate. I believe though if trojan with stealth capabilities, such as a new variant of sub-seven like trojan, ( i know it blows, but hey, there are still zombies out there cause of this piece of software!), will defeat antivirus if it gave its exe a recognisable name and user clicked on ok. as stated, the need for user interaction and intervention is good, but unfortunately, depends on user's level of knowledge.
btw, i think in network deployment tools, one can customise the install with allows etc ...... i havent fully done my r&d yet.
Does anyone know how to shut down this Windows XP sp2 firewall forever? It blocks our network until we shut it down "by hand". On every restart it is on again.
We are working with BlackIce, which may not be the best solution, but at least we do not have to run the Network wizard all the time to get the connections going.
timmendorf
Just use the 'Control Panel' -- see attachmentQuote:
Originally posted here by timmendorf
Does anyone know how to shut down this Windows XP sp2 firewall forever? It blocks our network until we shut it down "by hand". On every restart it is on again.
timmendorf
As far as XP w/SP2 It automactally turns on the Firewall
and it does to some extent has outgoing packet monitoring...
It will come up and ask if you want to allow an outgoing
connection like AOL IM just once, but the intermitted tendency
to do that does make me wonder.... I still keep a NAT router
between me and the net...
But the biggest problem is that SP2 is 278 megs.. which I carry
around a 512 meg memoy stick to carry SP2 around
as well as other utilities for all my service calls.
Personally, I liked the SP2 built in firewall. I found it to be adequate for what I needed. On a different topic, I also felt that the built in pop-up blocker was immensley helpful.
Thank you moxnix and Highlander.
I am behind a NAT router too.
My hope was to find a way to have our network working normally again in shutting down the Windows firewall permanently.
Regards
timmendorf