Searching \ for '[OT] sharing net connection beware of hackers' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=sharing+net+connection
Search entire site for: 'sharing net connection beware of hackers'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT] sharing net connection beware of hackers'
2000\05\07@232153 by Damon Hopkins

flavicon
face
Mark Willis wrote:
> Other options are a Linux firewall, "WinGate", and I've heard of others
> but don't remember them offhand.  If you don't set security (esp. on
> WinGate!) to reasonable levels, expect Spammers to "borrow" your
> computer to relay their tripe, and your ISP to harass you severely.  If
> I were up to speed on Linux I'd go that way, not quite yet.

PLEASE do not use WINGATE the net is unsecure enough already.
a sysadmin once setup an IRC bot to detect wingate usage (people using
other peoples addresses to go and create havoc on IRC) in about a day he
had collected over 1,000 unique wingate machines that ANYONE can
exploit.
also I'd block sharing your windows drives w/ at least a password. My
brother noticed some SAMBA request to his box (Window file sharing
requests) and promptly put a hacker.txt file on the guys desktop telling
him to better protect himself and leave people alone. kinda funny, he
(just to see if he could) deleted the guy's shortcut to netscape off the
desktop (not the program, just the shortcut to it)..  it's scary what
people can do to a networked computer.

               Damon Hopkins

2000\05\07@234925 by Mark Willis

flavicon
face
Damon Hopkins wrote:
{Quote hidden}

I haven't used WinGate;  I know at one point, the Wingate package was
shipped with all default settings at "Just take me over, I'm a BOZO."
Many people complained and I'm told that NOW, the default settings are
more like "Try it, you'll not be allowed and we'll call you names."  If
you set security up intelligently, I think WinGate'd be safe enough -
BUT.  With wingate.com being somewhat less than clueful, with IPRoute
needing just 1Mb RAM on a 386sx16 and a FDD, vs. WinGate requiring a
Win9x or NT or Win2k licence PLUS far better hardware, with the older
IPRoute versions available for free, and just $50 for the latest IPRoute
with NO NUsers limit, versus $69.95 for the 6-user only WinGate, with
WinGate Tech Support being pricey vs. free in e-mail support, and with
IPRoute being pretty well done, well, for now I'll run IPRoute.  And
move to Linux later on.

 Mark

2000\05\08@032800 by Michael Wieser

flavicon
face
>
>I haven't used WinGate;  I know at one point, the Wingate package was
>shipped with all default settings at "Just take me over, I'm a BOZO."
>Many people complained and I'm told that NOW, the default settings are
>more like "Try it, you'll not be allowed and we'll call you names."  If

This was before 2.1x, starting with 2.1 everything was more or less ok
afair, there is a great list for wingate btw. Wingate 2.1d is/was solid,
has some problems with games or phone over IP, WG3.05 was the first stable
version again, they now move to V4.x in beta. I`m still on 2.1d, running
since 1/1999 without problems on NT4WS SP3, then SP6a.

>you set security up intelligently, I think WinGate'd be safe enough -
>BUT.  With wingate.com being somewhat less than clueful, with IPRoute
>needing just 1Mb RAM on a 386sx16 and a FDD, vs. WinGate requiring a
>Win9x or NT or Win2k licence PLUS far better hardware,

NT4WS with a 486DX66 and 32MB RAM are well eonugh for 5 PCs, as long as you
use NTFS for the drive were wingate is located (FAT isn`t able to handle a
lot of files in one dir, when you set you chache high, the system goes down
because of FAT)

>with the older
>IPRoute versions available for free, and just $50 for the latest IPRoute
>with NO NUsers limit, versus $69.95 for the 6-user only WinGate, with
>WinGate Tech Support being pricey vs. free in e-mail support, and with
>IPRoute being pretty well done, well, for now I'll run IPRoute.  And
>move to Linux later on.
>


Anyway, if you have time and brain, do it with Linux or BSD, you will save
a lot of money and you can use a realy old PC (see above) for this box. You
won`t need a monitor too, because you should be able to use one COMport for
a V24-terminalconnection to one of your W98SE-boxes.
I would use in every case a 10baseT system, it`s enough for most things
related to the Internet and a 56k-connection. If you need fast connections
between your PCs you could use some 100baseT-NICs on those boxes which need
speed, the hub should be then one of those "switching" hubs, which
translates speed between the 10baseT section and 100baseT section.

good luck

Michael Wieser
spam_OUTm.k.wTakeThisOuTspamnextra.at

Service and Audiodesign

2000\05\08@185227 by hgraf

picon face
> PLEASE do not use WINGATE the net is unsecure enough already.
> a sysadmin once setup an IRC bot to detect wingate usage (people using
> other peoples addresses to go and create havoc on IRC) in about a day he
> had collected over 1,000 unique wingate machines that ANYONE can
> exploit.

       Quite frankly, Wingate is one of the more secure windows options, you just
have to know how to set it up. Older versions left services open by default,
the new versions leave barely anything open to the internal LAN, never mind
the net. I run Wingate and I've tried scanning my machine and doing other
sorts of things, of the ports that were open (I only had one that I
purposely opened for my web server) nothing was open, in fact most common
ports didn't even connect. TTYL

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2000 , 2001 only
- Today
- New search...