| TIP: Click on subject to list as thread! | ANSI |
| echo: | |
|---|---|
| to: | |
| from: | |
| date: | |
| subject: | Re: Firewall Question |
From: Gary Britt This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030704050400090706000009 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit OK, thanks for the info. I have a mix of winXP, win2K, and sometimes win98 machine, so I usually keep net bios turned on. If I understood you correctly you are saying that if I use static IP addresses for the machines in the peer network and make entries in each machine's hosts file then I wouldn't need net bios? If a machine is named "glb_mx7340" for example would the host entry look like this: "192.168.0.102 glb_mx7340" ?? And if I do this than to setup network shares and printer shares I would just need port 445 open on each machine? Both TCP and UDP or just one or the other? Thanks, Gary John Beckett wrote: > Gary Britt wrote in message > news:: > >> OK, so if you have a software firewall, I thought one of the advantages >> of having a software firewall was to keep virii and trojans from your >> side of the router/hardware firewall from getting on your machine. >> > > You (should) hear mostly about this in a corporate environment where a > workstation probably does NOT have shares and so does not need to open > holes to allow incoming connections. Therefore a worm on the local network > wold be much less likely to be able to penetrate such a workstation. > > But, as you say, if you share a folder then you need to open access to at > least some ports, and if a worm could exploit the service that you have > exposed, then you could be owned. > > If you have disabled NBT (NetBIOS-over-TCP) you only need to open access > to destination port 445/tcp (but then you would need working DNS or hosts > files to resolve names). > > Your firewall would still block connections to other ports not related to > sharing, so you would get some protection (although there shouldn't be > many of those ports on a workstation). > > But your essential point is correct. > > John > > --------------030704050400090706000009 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit OK, thanks for the info. I have a mix of winXP, win2K, and sometimes win98 machine, so I usually keep net bios turned on. If I understood you correctly you are saying that if I use static IP addresses for the machines in the peer network and make entries in each machine's hosts file then I wouldn't need net bios? If a machine is named "glb_mx7340" for example would the host entry look like this: "192.168.0.102 glb_mx7340" ?? And if I do this than to setup network shares and printer shares I would just need port 445 open on each machine? Both TCP and UDP or just one or the other? Thanks, Gary John Beckett wrote:* Origin: Barktopia BBS Site http://HarborWebs.com:8081 (1:379/45)Gary Britt <glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com>">mailto:glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com"><glbNOSPAM{at}gencogDOTcom.com> wrote in message news:<4">mailto:4552a6a1$1{at}w3.nls.net"><4 552a6a1$1{at}w3.nls.net>: OK, so if you have a software firewall, I thought one of the advantages of having a software firewall was to keep virii and trojans from your side of the router/hardware firewall from getting on your machine. You (should) hear mostly about this in a corporate environment where a workstation probably does NOT have shares and so does not need to open holes to allow incoming connections. Therefore a worm on the local network wold be much less likely to be able to penetrate such a workstation. But, as you say, if you share a folder then you need to open access to at least some ports, and if a worm could exploit the service that you have exposed, then you could be owned. If you have disabled NBT (NetBIOS-over-TCP) you only need to open access to destination port 445/tcp (but then you would need working DNS or hosts files to resolve names). Your firewall would still block connections to other ports not related to sharing, so you would get some protection (although there shouldn't be many of those ports on a workstation). But your essential point is correct. John --------------030704050400090706000009-- --- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5 SEEN-BY: 633/267 270 @PATH: 379/45 1 633/267 |
|
| SOURCE: echomail via fidonet.ozzmosis.com | |
Email questions or comments to sysop@ipingthereforeiam.com
All parts of this website painstakingly hand-crafted in the U.S.A.!
IPTIA BBS/MUD/Terminal/Game Server List, © 2025 IPTIA Consulting™.