Re: Firewall Software Recommendations?

[louise]

Sebastian G. wrote:
> louise wrote:
>
>
>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I like
>> Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and informative.
>
>
> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.

What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?

Louise

[Sebastian G.]

louise wrote:

> Sebastian G. wrote:
>> louise wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I like
>>> Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and informative.
>>
>> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.
>
> What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?


Google and Wikipedia exist...

(Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software for
the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any security.)

[Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers]

In comp.security.firewalls louise <louise@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Sebastian G. wrote:
>> louise wrote:
>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I like
>>> Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and informative.
>>
>> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.
>
> What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?

http://www.just****inggoogleit.com/

F'up2csf to put an end to this braindead crossposting over five groups.

cu
59cobalt
--
"If a software developer ever believes a rootkit is a necessary part of
their architecture they should go back and re-architect their solution."
--Mark Russinovich

[David H. Lipman]

From: "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de>

|
|
| Google and Wikipedia exist...
|
| (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software for
| the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any security.)

One can check software that has vulnerabilities and if those applications have updates
through the Secunia Software Inspector. It will identify installed applications that should
be updated that have not been updated and leave you "at risk".

http://secunia.com/software_inspector

--
Dave
http://www.claymania.com/removal-trojan-adware.html
Multi-AV - http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp

[Richard Steinfeld]

Sebastian G. wrote:
> louise wrote:
>
>> Sebastian G. wrote:
>>> louise wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I
>>>> like Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and
>>>> informative.
>>>
>>> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.
>>
>> What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?
>
>
> Google and Wikipedia exist...
>
> (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software
> for the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any
> security.)

What the hell kind of arrogant answer was that?

[louise]

David H. Lipman wrote:
> From: "Sebastian G." <seppi@seppig.de>
>
> |
> |
> | Google and Wikipedia exist...
> |
> | (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software for
> | the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any security.)
>
> One can check software that has vulnerabilities and if those applications have updates
> through the Secunia Software Inspector. It will identify installed applications that should
> be updated that have not been updated and leave you "at risk".
>
> http://secunia.com/software_inspector
>

I do check my software with secunia on a regular basis.

And I don't understand what is meant by checking your
security software - I do a shields up check on a regular
basis, run Nod32 and SuperAntiSpyware along with Spybot on a
periodic basis.

I seem to have gotten attacked because I asked a question -
and the attack assumes I don't take responsibility for my
own security - there is no basis that I know of for this
assumption.

Louise

[Krazee Brenda]

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:40:34 -0800, Richard Steinfeld wrote:

> Sebastian G. wrote:
>> louise wrote:
>>
>>> Sebastian G. wrote:
>>>> louise wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I
>>>>> like Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and
>>>>> informative.
>>>>
>>>> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.
>>>
>>> What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?
>>
>> Google and Wikipedia exist...
>>
>> (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software
>> for the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any
>> security.)
>
> What the hell kind of arrogant answer was that?

TruthWare
--
See Brenda's UniWorldWare
http://************/nm2yt

[Gerald Vogt]

On Feb 16, 3:37 pm, louise <lou...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> And I don't understand what is meant by checking your
> security software - I do a shields up check on a regular
> basis, run Nod32 and SuperAntiSpyware along with Spybot on a
> periodic basis.
>
> I seem to have gotten attacked because I asked a question -
> and the attack assumes I don't take responsibility for my
> own security - there is no basis that I know of for this
> assumption.

Then why do you install all this strange security software? It does
not take responsibility for your own security.

Gerald

[Bear Bottoms]

On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 01:10:23 -0600, Straight Talk <b__nice@hotmail.com>
wrote:

> I don't think anyone questioned whether you take responsibility for
> your own security. Some might have indicated though, that the
> countermeasures you seem to have taken somehow shows that you may lack
> the knowledge to do so properly.

I wouldn't know if she does or not. It doesn't really matter as she is
demonstrating willingness to communicate. I do see you lack communication
skills, which loses knowledge.

--
Bear Bottoms
Freeware Website http://bearware.info

[Sebastian G.]

Richard Steinfeld wrote:

> Sebastian G. wrote:
>> louise wrote:
>>
>>> Sebastian G. wrote:
>>>> louise wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I'm now using Online Armor free in addition to an NAT Router. I
>>>>> like Online Armor very much and find it's "nags" are clear and
>>>>> informative.
>>>> I find it nags an obvious attack point for a shatter attack.
>>> What does that mean? What is a shatter attack?
>>
>> Google and Wikipedia exist...
>>
>> (Oh, and in fact, if you never bothered to check your security software
>> for the most obvious security vulnerabilities, then you never had any
>> security.)
>
> What the hell kind of arrogant answer was that?


Well, if we started to explain shatter attacks whenever someone asks...

Oh, and the fact that his "security" software is full of obvious security
vulnerabilities is just amusing.