|
Posted by Kayman on September 7, 2007, 6:25 pm
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Does having both XP firewall enabled and at the same time Norton Internet
> Security enabled cause problems?
>
The retail version of Norton can play havoc with your pc. Uninstall it using
Norton's own uninstall tool
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT/tsgeninfo.nsf/docid/2005033108162039
and get a refund :)
As suggested on the site, you may wish to print out the directions before
proceeding.
If this doesn't work use this:
Revo Uninstaller Freeware - Remove unwanted programs and traces easily
http://www.revouninstaller.com/
and/or
RegSeeker
http://www.hoverdesk.net/freeware.htm
Then use NTREGOPT to compact the registry then do a reboot immediately.
http://www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt
While Norton's removal tool usually gets the job done, you may also want to
go to:
http://www.snapfiles.com/get/winsockxpfix.html
and download a copy of winsockxpfix just in case. Rarely, the removal of NIS
breaks the networking components in XP to the point where internet access is
impossible. This little utility will fix it back up.
Use/activate Win XP SP2 built-in Firewall
and uncheck *all* Programs and Services under the Exception tab.
Read through:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/security/internet/sp2_wfintro.mspx
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/networking/security/winfirewall.mspx
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/308127
How to Configure Windows Firewall on a Single Computer
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/security/smallbusiness/prodtech/windowsxp/cfgfwall.mspx
Read these articles:
"Personal Firewalls" are mostly snake-oil
http://www.samspade.org/d/firewalls.html
At Least This Snake Oil Is Free
http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesper/archive/2007/07/19/at-least-this-snake-oil-is-free.aspx
Deconstructing Common Security Myths.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/technetmag/issues/2006/05/SecurityMyths/default.aspx
Myth: Host-Based Firewalls Must Filter Outbound Traffic to be Safe.
Exploring the windows Firewall.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/technetmag/issues/2007/06/VistaFirewall/default.aspx
"Outbound protection is security theater-it's a gimmick that only gives the
impression of improving your security without doing anything that actually
does improve your security."
|
|
Posted by Volker Birk on September 8, 2007, 5:20 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Does having both XP firewall enabled and at the same time Norton
> Internet Security enabled cause problems?
Yes. Compared to only having Windows-Firewall enabled, you don't gain
any additional security effects, but you're adding the security holes
Norton InSecurity brings with it.
Yours,
VB.
--
"Es muss darauf geachtet werden, dass das Grundgesetz nicht mit Methoden
geschützt wird, die seinem Ziel und seinem Geist zuwider sind."
Gustav Heinemann, "Freimütige Kritik und demokratischer Rechtsstaat"
|
|
Posted by David Azose on September 8, 2007, 8:44 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>> Does having both XP firewall enabled and at the same time Norton
>> Internet Security enabled cause problems?
>
> Yes. Compared to only having Windows-Firewall enabled, you don't gain
> any additional security effects, but you're adding the security holes
> Norton InSecurity brings with it.
>
> Yours,
> VB.
Thank you for the clarification. I'm reading up on uninstalling NIS.
Apparently, there may be some problems with using the Windows uninstall
option from the control panel. Some here have suggested downloading the
Norton uninstall program from their website. That's probably what I'll
do. Thanks again for your help.
David A.
|
|
Posted by Mr. Arnold on September 8, 2007, 10:46 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Volker Birk wrote:
>>> Does having both XP firewall enabled and at the same time Norton
>>> Internet Security enabled cause problems?
>>
>> Yes. Compared to only having Windows-Firewall enabled, you don't gain
>> any additional security effects, but you're adding the security holes
>> Norton InSecurity brings with it.
>>
>> Yours,
>> VB.
> Thank you for the clarification. I'm reading up on uninstalling NIS.
> Apparently, there may be some problems with using the Windows uninstall
> option from the control panel. Some here have suggested downloading the
> Norton uninstall program from their website. That's probably what I'll do.
> Thanks again for your help.
If you want to be bold and beautiful, why don't you get rid of the XP FW
too? Since you have a router setting there protecting the machine or
machines from the Internet. What do you need the XP FW for, because it's
buying you nothing -- no added protection.
The router and XP FW/packet filter are doing the same thing, and it's
unclear amount your router, because you make no mention of the model of the
Linksys router to determine if it can stop outbound traffic. If the router
can't stop outbound traffic, XP's FW for sure cannot stop outbound traffic
and both can only stop inbound traffic, then why do you need the XP FW
enabled?
And as long as XP's FW is sitting behind that NAT router, because XP's FW
can only stop inbound traffic just like the NAT router, then using the XP FW
router behind the NAT router is pointless. It buys you nothing.
http://www.homenethelp.com/web/explain/about-NAT.asp
|
|
Posted by Volker Birk on September 8, 2007, 11:06 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options > If you want to be bold and beautiful, why don't you get rid of the XP FW
> too?
I see no reason why to do so.
> And as long as XP's FW is sitting behind that NAT router, because XP's FW
> can only stop inbound traffic just like the NAT router, then using the XP FW
> router behind the NAT router is pointless. It buys you nothing.
This is wrong.
Following the "defense in depth" strategy, the heuristics used for
packet filtering usually have holes, so a second filtering could help.
Of course, it would be better not to offer network services at all if
one does not need to.
Yours,
VB.
--
"Es muss darauf geachtet werden, dass das Grundgesetz nicht mit Methoden
geschützt wird, die seinem Ziel und seinem Geist zuwider sind."
Gustav Heinemann, "Freimütige Kritik und demokratischer Rechtsstaat"
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Are there any firewall software that block programs from running? | March 4, 2005, 4:57 pm |
| Security programs 2005 - , Firewall programs 2005 -, Antivirus programs 2005 -, APPDEV DOT NET SECURITY, Linux Security and Firewall programs 2005 -, CiscoWorks ( CW ) Security programs 2005 - , | February 25, 2005, 5:03 am |
| Firewall problems with file-share programs [help needed!] | May 27, 2005, 5:04 am |
| Firewall running, but where??? | May 19, 2006, 10:10 pm |
| Is Software Firewall Necessary with a H/W already running? | July 30, 2004, 8:30 pm |
| Is it possible for someone to access my HD even though I am running a firewall? | October 31, 2005, 7:38 pm |
| Port closed but no firewall is running | March 21, 2007, 10:30 am |
| New Firewall but "Security" says "Norton is currently running..." | May 12, 2007, 1:06 am |
| VelociRaptor Firewall donated to school - having trouble getting it running | December 9, 2004, 2:48 pm |
| how to monitor programs accessing the net... | December 17, 2004, 8:42 pm |
|
XML site map