Re: FIX for ZoneAlarm & KB951748 issue released
On Fri, 18 Jul 2008 12:43:26 -0300, John John (MVP) wrote:
<snip for brevity>
>>>Before Windows XP what were people using?
>>
>> I don't know but *I* was using a 3rd party (so-called) firewall application
>> and (incidentally) Registry Cleaner 
>
> What do registry cleaners have to do with firewalls? Why are you even
> mentioning them here, if only as a feeble attempt to muddle the issue?
John, John (MVP), as I mentioned in a preceding thread, you can't be very
intelligent and your lateral thinking capabilities are vitually not
existent! Prior NT these apps were basically regarded essential tools.
Don't you you know the meaning of *"incidentally"*?
> If third party firewalls are only "so-called firewalls" then the Windows
> XP firewall is no different, it too is nothing more than a personal
> firewall.
The WinXp firewall application is an *integral* part of the OS and deals
with inbound protection and therefore does not give you a false sense of
security. Best of all, it doesn't implement lots of nonsense like
pretending that outbound traffic needs to be monitored. And yes,
technically speaking, 'firewall' is really a misnomer.
>>> What were they using on NT4 and on Windows 2000?
>>
>>
>> I don't know.
>
> That doesn't surprise me.
Why is that, and what is that supposed to mean?
Ah, I recall a statement you made in a previous message:
"*We all know* that the Windows firewall is sufficient and good at it's
job...".
I envy you for having the gift to know thoughts of others. (And my crystal
ball ain't working - bummer).
>>>Just because XP got a firewall now anything else has suddenly become
>>>unfit for use?
>>
>>
>> Well, these are throwaway words; If you were more open-minded' in relation
>> to OS's and read (*and* comprehend) through pertinent write-ups (even in
>> this thread), than it'd be obvious to you - and no, I am not a techie
>
> I am more open minded than you are!
But it seems your comprehension is lacking
> I have no quibbles about which
> firewall people decide to use, if they want to use the Windows firewall
> that is fine, the Windows firewall offers protection for what it was
> design to do, there is nothing wrong with it at all. If users want to
> use other good firewalls that offer different features that is fine too,
Agree, as long it is not a 3rd party software (so-called) firewall!
When starting learning to drive a car I wanted to drive on the 'left' side
of the road because at the time I thought there was nothing wrong with it
all, in fact I thought that driving on the middle of the road is much
safer. Boy am I glad that somebody put me straight!
> many of these other firewalls are also good and they do everything that
> the Windows firewall does plus they give users additional features that
> users have asked for. That is fine by me,
We are talking about 3rd party software (so-called) firewall applications!
The user gets easily blinded by all the hype created by the makers of 3rd
party (so-called) firewalls. Now they believe it (your're one of them) and
if an opportunity presents itself I will continue posting links with
articles saying otherwise in order to create some realistic counterbalance.
Heck, even Sunbelt (the makers of Kerio) concede that outbound controll of
their software is basically a useless POS.
In the end it's the user (not you or I) who'll decide.
> I don't care what they use...
Nor do I. But *you* should be ashamed of yourself for making such a
statement. As a MVP you should set an example and advise novices and the
uninformed to the best of your ability and in accordance with your vast and
specialized knowledge (isn't that you've got the 'badge' in the first
place?)! And all you can say "I don't care".
> providing that they use something!
(LOL) I refrain from commenting! Except that I sincerely believe that you
must have demonstrated some skills prior being awarded with a MVP badge.
Would you please stick to these particular skills and refrain from
commenting and/or making statements related to Internet Security!
(Embarrasing, really).
> You on the other hand think that you
> should dictate your views onto others and that you should be telling
> them what to do.
Bunk, you don't know what what I am thinking [PERIOD]!
I provide links to educational articles provided by well respected authors
who are highly regarded and respected in the Internet Security Community;
Their credentials are outstanding!
I know you disregard the writings of these authors as 'nonsense'. You do
recall your statement in a previous post:
"I really don't know why you keep spewing this *nonsense* out..."
'Nuff said.
> You are on a religious zeal to convert the masses.
Call it what you wish. Based on what I know, I am eager providing a counter
balance, the accompanied links of my posts speak for themself (if
understood).
> When users tell you they want other features all you can do is berate
> them and try to impose your views on them.
You tried this before. Providing educational links to the uninformed can
hardly be considered 'berating'.
You're some kind of a frustrated individual, to say the least!
> The fact is that there is
> nothing wrong with many of the third party firewalls out there and if
> users want to use them it really is none of your business.
The fact is there are a lot of things wrong with these Illusion ware! You
just don't seem do understand it. I will continue making it my business
providing links to educational article, so what are you going to do about
it? Users can take heed or ignore these write-ups. Heck, it's a free
country and this is usenet.
If you feel so strong about it, why don't you join a moderated forum!
> You're attempt to discredit all third party firewalls is plainly
> misguided, the facts are that many of these other products are also good
> products and many are free.
Since almost all educational and factual write-ups fail to get commercial
support, my effort to provide this material opposing the hype created by
the makers of 3rd party software (so-called) firwall is justified and
right.
Now be honest, which software company do you work for?
> The bottom line is that you and others in your camp simply cannot back
> that notion that you perpetuate that all third party firewalls are
> incapable of protecting users. That is untrue, it is a lie, plain and
> simple, there is no other way to put it.
The bottom line is that 3rd party (so-called) firewall applications
promoting the importance of 'outbound control" are *without exception*
snake oil!
BTW, aside from your MVP badge, what are your credentials?