Re: Firewall Necessity
From: Spiderman (spiderman_at_spiderman.com)
Date: 02/28/04
- Next message: Phil Sheridan: "X P Pro snubs Home Edition!"
- Previous message: PowerDrome: "Net Send cannot find alias"
- In reply to: HillBillyBuddhist: "Re: Firewall Necessity"
- Next in thread: jch: "Re: Firewall Necessity"
- Reply: jch: "Re: Firewall Necessity"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 28 Feb 2004 12:53:11 -0500
"HillBillyBuddhist" <hillbillybuddhist@shoescolumbus.rr.com> wrote in
message news:uMw53Uf$DHA.2292@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> "Spiderman" <spiderman@spiderman.com> wrote in message
> news:rcednet3Mdsk1d3dRVn-vg@comcast.com...
> Can
> | anyone give me an actual example of an outside attack on a non-virus
> | infected PC that causes ACTUAL damage or theft to the PC...
> |
>
> Yes. One good reason (among many already mentioned) to run a firewall.
DDos
> attacks. (see link below)
>
> http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,289893,sid9_gci557336,00.html
>
> You see where it says;
>
> "On the Internet, a distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attack is one in
> which a multitude of compromised systems attack a single target"
>
> You know what those "compromised systems" making these attacks are? They
are
> thousands of personal computers belonging to every day people just like
you
> and me. These systems all became "compromised" when software installed on
> their computers carried a hidden payload that "compromised" their system
and
> turned it into a zombie to be used in an DDos attack.
>
> Antivirus software isn't stopping it. A NAT router won't stop it. *A
> properly installed and configured firewall on the other hand will.* DDos
> attacks can only occur if the "compromised" computer can make an outbound
> connection.
>
> As many others have told you times have changed. For example when Windows
XP
> came out inbound firewall protection seemed to be good enough. Now it
isn't.
> Windows XP SP2 will address the issue by making their firewall
> bi-directional. Even Microsoft can see the need . <g>
>
> I know you're too smart to be taken in. That's what the thousands of
already
> compromised computer owners thought/think. You could be compromised right
> now but without a firewall to warn you of a parasite attempting to make an
> outbound connection from your computer you'd have no way of knowing it.
>
> Not your problem? Sure is. DDos attacks alone are costing the IT community
> millions of dollars in lost productivity and security expenditures. (yes
> millions) Who do you think ultimately winds up paying for the increased
> cost? That's right you and me. Internet service, banking, software,
> Antivirus subscription renewals, cellular service, anything you can name
> that uses technology (and what doesn't) costs more because of these types
of
> security concerns. In today's Internet environment it is everyone's
> responsibility to take proper steps in securing their own computers. This
> includes a firewall.
>
> You said in your first post you wanted to hear from the experts (of which
I
> am decidedly *not* one) You've heard from several and they all agree, yet
> you continue to argue. Why again did you ask?
I really DO want to hear expert opinions...that's why I asked. The example
you just gave is, once again, regarding a PC that has been infected with a
virus. Virus-infected PC's don't count in my thinking since they've ALREADY
been compromised...usually through user-error. Now, user errors aside...why
do I need a firewall if I'm vigilant about keeping viruses (and faulty
programs in general) off my PC? Since I haven't gotten a good reason, I will
keep my firewall down, and I suggest the more educated computer users out
there do the same. Don't believe the hype!
- Next message: Phil Sheridan: "X P Pro snubs Home Edition!"
- Previous message: PowerDrome: "Net Send cannot find alias"
- In reply to: HillBillyBuddhist: "Re: Firewall Necessity"
- Next in thread: jch: "Re: Firewall Necessity"
- Reply: jch: "Re: Firewall Necessity"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
