ZoneAlarm 3.1

Topic

New Reply

New version of ZA has been posted. One MUST use the “Check for update” process from the Configure tab.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Replies

Oh boy, it’s been a number of (many) months since I tried ZA, Dave. I can’t remember if ZA and McAfee antivirus “play well” together. Do you know if they get along OK? (Until such time as I’m able to go back to AVG).

On my home system, I have a Linksys DSL router and I think I read where Linksys and ZA have cooked up a mutual deal, so I don’t guess I’ve got to worry about that, huh?

Reply | Quote

Does ZA have a required AV component or can one use just the firewall and continue w/ current AV program?

Reply | Quote

Indeed you can run both. And you should. Firewalls protect against a different kind of attack than AV software does. ZA won’t require anything in the way of antivirus scanning. I had it working smoothly with Norton AV 2002 and Microsoft Outlook. Norton caught the virii, ZoneAlarm quarantined suspicious file types in a manner much better than Microsoft’s rather overdone approach. That continues to be my experience with Outpost firewall at home. All that, and hardware firewalling in the Linksys Router too. No problems.

Reply | Quote

Okay, great! I will try it out! (The image above gave me the impression initially that it was AV as well.)

Reply | Quote

You may be happy to know that I’ve been using AVG with ZA on my XPP system since its inception and they work in perfect harmony.

Reply | Quote

I just paid for ZAPro. It includes e-mail virus scans and a place to block pop-up ads. I don’t know enough to know if this is adequate by itself.

It included a separate program called PEST PATROL which is supposed to scan your computer for trojans etc. Unfortunately this one sometimes causes my computer to freeze.

But what I really like is being able to trace down the attempts to access my computer. Why in the world would someone in SouthAfrica want to contact my computer? Now my curiosity wants to contact the dude to find out what is going on. Trouble is that would give him positive feedback on his access attempt and i don’t want to do that.

This is probably in ZA info somewhere but I am wondering what happens at the other end when ZA refuses a contact. Does it tell them “refused” “unavailable” “nosuch” or “dropdead”. How about a message saying “A second attempt to contact this computer will result in your system being fried?”

Reply | Quote

Hi
ZAPro : You may have noticed, you have Read Only privileges in the Lounge Forums if you have Cookie controls set to Medium or higher.
It does the best job of any program I know at blocking pop-up and banner ads.
Enable Stealth Mode. This means any probe will not be acknowledged, nor will it find you. Your ports are totally invisible to any snooper.
If you want to find out (and report) these probers get Zone Log Analyser – its not free but it is inexpensive. here
(Don’t forget to enable ‘Log Alerts’)

Reply | Quote

Thanks MerCurmudgeon You are right I did have to do some customizing to get a couple of my favorites to work properly with ZAPro. What I don’t understand is why this Lounge needs third party cookies.

I see some people mention slowing down because of some of these programs. I have noticed a considerable slow down since I got my new bigger faster computer but same 56k dial up. Would this possibly be from ZA or NoAds or AVG?

Reply | Quote

Bookie ~

I accept only first party and block third party cookies and haven’t had any problems. Now that ZA is on I do have a problem connecting to my server via ftp.

I don’t know about NoAds, but AVG has never affected performance whatsoever. I have noticed a marked difference in page load, however, since installing ZA. I freaked out earlier as my e-mail links would not allow me to connect and my FTP will not allow me to connect unless I have the ZA active. If I shut it down, it won’t allow any activity. I figured this out finally and have some growing pains w/ the learning curve, but I think so far it is worthwhile.

Reply | Quote

[indent]

---

and my FTP will not allow me to connect unless I have the ZA active. If I shut it down, it won’t allow any activity.

---

[/indent] Does this mean if you shut down ZA? On my first run, ZA asked about CuteFTP Pro and hasn’t complained ever since. And I’ve been to my web site by FTP from both my browser and CuteFTP Pro. What kind of ZA message to you get?

On the other hand, I’m still having a problem with ZA blocking an attempt of SVCHOST.EXE to contact my ISP’s DNS1 and DNS2 I.P. addresses. This morning there was another ZA block message on the screen. Knowing only that SVCHOST.EXE is a Win XP component, I have it listed as trusted in ZA so I don’t know what’s going on. As I said in my earlier post, maybe it’s my sometimes-flaky Linksys router.

So many variables, so much to consider, right? At least I haven’t seen any slowdowns in browsing or email. Even Mailwasher is doing fine.

Reply | Quote

…’trusted’, yes, but have you also opted to allow it to act as a server? As this program is needed to allow scripts to run :
a. if you never run script, disable it
b. if you do need to run script (eg the active content of web pages) make sure Mobile Code Control (ZAPro) is set to Off, and you are protected by something on the lines of Script Sentry, obtainable here

Reply | Quote

Yes, it’s also got server permission. ZA asked me that when I first installed it (ZA). I don’t have ZA Pro (yet). According to the ZA log, that program tried to access my ISP’s DNS address shortly after midnight and again at around 6:30 this morning. I don’t remember what page my browser was sitting on when I went to bed last night, but I think I’ll close the browser when I go to bed tonight and see if it happens again. The only “script” thing I can think of is that I have a date/time javascript on my home web page, but I wouldn’t think my “computer” would care about that. This may be a networking question, I don’t know.

In the TCP/IP properties of this machine, I have the two DNS numbers for my ISP and I don’t know if I should take them out or not. My Linksys router has those numbers in it, so maybe I shouldn’t let Win XP know what they are, huh? I also already have the IP address of the router in TCP/IP properties.

Reply | Quote

Al ~

If I turn on my ‘puter and get online, pageloads will be denied until I turn on ZA and I cannot connect LeechFTP on the ‘net w/o ZA being on. I do not get a message, rather, my server says unable to connect. It’s okay and I’m figuring this out and I am overcome w/ warmth of security it seems to provide. Only bummer is the small but noticeable slowdowns on web.

Reply | Quote

Sorry, Al have to disagree with you. McAfee VS has a terrible (and justified) reputation for interfering with the operation of Windows and changing things where it should not. It also costs money, even for the necessary sig file updates (after a brief honeymoon period). You are one of the few satisfied customers I know of. Some of its other products are nothing short of laughable.

I attach a query from ‘somewhere else’ along with my reply, both from the last couple of days.

——————————————————————————–
Query : Mcafee is saying that PC Booster can speed up my computer (P11 350, 384mb RAM, WXPP) “by an incredible 100%” saying “in fact, it helps your PC RUN LIKE NEW”. All this at a special offer price $24.95.
Does anyone have any experience and/or comments on this product?
——————————————————————————–
My Reply : Most charitable view : marketing hype
Realistic View : sounds too good to be true, so it isn’t.
Personal predilection : I would not allow anything with the name McAfee anywhere near my computer systems. *
I might recommend their products to others were I either irresponsible, ignorant or a sadist (or all 3 come to think of it). Since I’m none of them, I won’t. Purely a personal viewpoint – I know one user who swears by the VS.**
‘Run like new’ seems to me to be an inappropriate turn of phrase, since this is the very time users find most problems. If your PC needs a speed boost, there’s a host of things you can do before spending money on software pseudo-solutions. One is to upgrade your memory, though with 384Mb already I doubt you’d notice a difference – unless you are in the habit of having n applications open at once, where n is larger than 3.
———————————————————————————-

* Yeah, I know. Someone in the Lounge said that and I happen to agree with it wholeheartedly.
** That’s you, Al.

To repeat : AVG does a far better job, is compatible with all Windows platforms and is FREE. You have my assurance on all points. What more could you ask?

ypymaytyc

PS: I think the point about badmouthing MS is not that Windows is rubbish, but that it has flaws which, with a little more care and expertise, could have been avoided from the outset.

Cheers

Reply | Quote

Funnily enough, I feel exactly the same way about Norton…

Reply | Quote

MerC, may I PLEASE say to you what I said to Dave? This thread is about ZONE ALARM, in fact opened by Dave. Some of us would like to talk about ZA.

Now, I have a suggestion. If you and Dave and all the other users in the world feel so strongly about McAfee ANTIVIRUS program, would you please open another thread and enumerate, one by one, the specific things it does wrong – the ANTIVIRUS software, not any of the other fluff they try to sell.

Reply | Quote

Exactly. Everybody! Stick with the topic and stop the thread…

Reply | Quote

[indent]

---

One is to upgrade your memory, though with 384Mb already I doubt you’d notice a difference – unless you are in the habit of having n applications open at once, where n is larger than 3.

---

[/indent]My personal experience is that with 256Mb and running 6 or more apps at once I still do not have to dip into a swap file. I did receive a big boost though when I upgraded from 64Mb to the 256Mb, and the new Cacheman does seem to have the memory running a little smoother as well. (You may find Cacheman useful just to keep an eye on how your memory is being used, even if you don’t use it to tweak your memory settings.)

Reply | Quote

[indent]

---

MerC, may I PLEASE say to you what I said to Dave? This thread is about ZONE ALARM, in fact opened by Dave. Some of us would like to talk about ZA

---

[/indent]
I have made several contributions to this thread regarding ZA. As for hijacking it, I refer you to your own post 162023, which started, or at least continued, the side-track.
Anyway, a thread about ZA, should talk about other protection programs it may or may not work properly with. I quote : “I can’t remember if ZA and McAfee antivirus “play well” together. Do you know if they get along OK?” which are your very words.
An attempt to stifle discussion around rather than dead on a particular topic is a well known ploy to marginalise conclusions that may not be in accordance with cherished beliefs. I have no intention of keeping quiet on your say-so, nor would I expect you to do so on my account. I think I can guess your reaction to “Al, may I PLEASE ask you to stop going on about how you need to be told how bad McAfee VS really is based on the frantic pleas from a large clientelle? It may confuse newbies. Some of us would like to get on with life “

Reply | Quote

I used to use Zone Alarm when I had Windows 98 SE and it actually interfered with my connecting to the Internet through my cable modem.

I would like to try it again with Win XP (which is what I have now). Does anyone know any particular settings I should use so it doesn’t interfere with my connecting to the Internet?

Reply | Quote

I’ve never had any issues with the default settings, right out of the “box”. I think it’s more likely your Win98 installation suffered from some hidden problems that only became evident when you used certain programs…..ZoneAlarm in this case.

Reply | Quote

Like wise I am using ZA out of the box with AT&T cable and have been for a few years .

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

May I ask youse guys a question? I hope this is a “positive” thing. I’ve had ZA installed for only a week and I know that’s no time at all. But I’ve had “only” two alerts from ZA that it has blocked a couple of attempted visitors. I guess I fully expected to see several blocks per day, given what I used to see a few years ago when I was using BlackIce Defender. I don’t know whether all the dirt bags out there have no interest in my computer or MIGHT the fact that I also have a Linksys router in the mix, which I did not have in the early times of BlackIce. I know that the Linksys claims to be “somewhat” of a firewall in that it supposedly makes me invisible to outsiders, but I didn’t expect to be coming up this clean. Whatever it is, I ain’t complainin’ just curious what others of you may see on “average” in terms of ZA blockages.

I was curious too about the two reports ZA did give me, so I used NeoTrace Pro to try to see where they came from. All I could tell was that the IP addresses were in the AOL arena.

Reply | Quote

I don’t know that it’s unusual. I think that a great many of the scans that the firewalls block are poorly explained and understood even less. And certainly your Linksys router is playing a part in this too, as does mine. You can view the configuration of your router using your web browser – typically Linksys is set to an internal IP address of 192.168.1.1. This address is invisible to the outside world, thanks to the firewalling and NAT that is going on.

Honestly, I don’t even think about my firewall until it pops up and tells me that something wants to phone home, at which point I raise an eyebrow and weigh the pros and cons of the request (don’t get me started on my rant about NTBACKUP.EXE needing to access the Internet). Incoming attacks are so well cordoned off that I don’t even bother with the logs most of the time.

Reply | Quote

Thanks for the comments, Mark. Oh, I’ve had the Linksys ever since I went DSL a few years ago. Mine is customized away from that “usual” address since I also have RADMIN installed so my son and I can work on each other’s computers remotely. When I first got the Linksys, I think it was Gibson’s web site that I had check me out and if memory serves me, it declared me “stealth.” That’s how come I’ve resisted ZA all this time.

Which reminds me (your phone home remark), no one ever commented about my earlier question about how come SVCHOST.EXE was trying to contact the DNS servers of my ISP. I stopped the ZA complaint by adding the DNS1 and DNS2 addresses to my friendly zone. The only thing I can figure is that Tardis must try calling my DNS server when it’s attempting to go to one of its sources, using the Windows program to do it. Does that make any sense?

Anyway, let the dirt bags beware! Rock On!

Reply | Quote

Now, back to ZA! Bruce, I assume that means you’re not running ZA at Windows startup, huh? When I read your post, I shutdown ZA, restarted my browser and was still able to load pages. I’m going to tell ZA not to load at boot, restart the computer and see if I get the same problem you’re having. As for speed degradation, I don’t see any at all. I wonder if ZA on your machine is bumping into something else?

Reply | Quote

Big Al ~

Yes, you assume correctly, I do not run ZA at start-up. If it is not running, how am I being prevented from page loads and accessing my server? Bumping, I am not sure, but I doubt it. I have nothing running in the background except AVG and the users in this thread use that and have not indicated any problems.

Before this puppy gets locked up, I gotta on both Norton and SMcAfee.

I wish I had been on it so I could’ve used a perfect ‘hijack in progress’ image I’ve been saving for just the right moment. (no sneak previews, !)

Reply | Quote

List ALL that you have running in the list provided by Task Manager, it may give us a clue as to what may be giving you problems.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Here it is….at the time of this screenshot I was d/l the update. I had to shutdown ZA to do it and look, here I am! It seems I have to turn ZA on since I have it set to NOT load at start-up, then shut it down to at least access pageloads.

Reply | Quote

What is WNCSMS~1.exe ?
I see that Juno is using 25,640K, this is the AOL like interface from juno

What Applactions are listed under the “Applactions” tab?

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Not sure what WNCSMS is, but I believe it is a system service. The juno interface is nothing like the America Offline interface, but yes, it was open at the time. At the time that was shot, the only apps running were Juno and IE as they are now. Crap! Now ZA won’t let me connect to my e-mail at all!!

Reply | Quote

I haven’t used ZoneAlarm since Version 2, some time ago. My memory is that it provided a replacement device driver for part of the TCP/IP stack, so if the application isn’t running it will stop all IP traffic. But I may be wrong.

StuartR

Reply | Quote

Before I upgraded to ZA 3.1, I had to activate ZA when I first turned the ‘puter on, then if I chose, shut it down before I could retrieve e-mail or access web or servers. Now with the upgrade, it seems I have to have it on period to do anything or ~nada~. But then, I am still learning ZA and may just be temporarily ig’nant!

Reply | Quote

I tried to duplicate Bruce’s problem, since I’m “new” to ZA also. (See earlier post). No problems on my XP Pro machine if I shutdown ZA.

Reply | Quote

I’m back, Bruce. I un-checked the ZA start-at-Windows-startup option and POWERED OFF my machine. Upon restart I went to two web pages that are time stamped to make sure I was getting the current stuff, not cache ( CNN and USA Today). Both loaded as usual and pretty quickly as well. Looks like there’s a snake somewhere in your total-system. Wonder how ZA could possibly prevent your browser from accessing web pages if it’s not got something ELSE running in the background somewhere? Keep us posted.

As for my question that no one ever answered! Yesterday, I put the DNS1 and DNS2 IP addresses of my ISP into the ZA “trusted” zone list and the warnings I had gotten on two consecutive days were NOT there this morning. I have no idea why the Windows program, SVCHOST.EXE, is “contacting” or querying my DNS servers, but…..

Reply | Quote

As an aside, I believe it was Steve Gibson of SpinRite fame who tracked a hacker’s address back, found that he had shared a printer to the Internet, and sent a print job to the effect of “We Know What You’re Doing, Knock It Off” to the printer. The attacks promptly ceased. This is not to suggest that you or I or any other mere mortal will ever be so lucky as to find an open printer on the web, but you never know.

Reply | Quote

When you get ‘er installed, Bruce, you’ll see a description that says their mail checking is ONLY watching for .VBS attachments. Says it will quarantine them if it see one. But I think your AVG already does that..

For Dave: [indent]

---

I don NOT know about McAffee, as I will not allow any product with that name on any of my systems. They get deleted if they come on a new machine.

---

[/indent] Funny how that goes. I’ve had those same sentiments about so-called Norton’s stuff, ever since the days when Peter Norton sold out. Remove it, remove it, quickly

Reply | Quote

Peter Norton may have sold out but he is on the board of directors and still has his hands on some of the research. The way McAfee takes over a machine and will slow things down is NOT for me.
In my book, the only thing worst than a machine with McAfee is one with AOL on it also and the machine was made by Compaq.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Couldn’t have said it better myself. Those are the three shoddiest software/personal computer products around. Norton isn’t a model of wonder, their tech support is at times bone-headed and sometimes downright ignorant. I don’t want to get into a flame war, but I have only one voice in this stuff with manufacturers – and that’s to take my money down the street. I don’t expect perfection, but I do expect things to work!!

Reply | Quote

If you want to here more about McAfee being a virus just drop by http://www.pcnineoneone.com/cgi-bin/dcforu…uter&conf=conf1%5B/url%5D. There is not to many over that will even use the term, let alone install it on their machines.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

Aw c’mon Dave. Get a life. That’s as bad as all the people who bad-mouth Microsoft for what turns out to be the best operating system we’ve ever had. It’s one thing to have had a bad experience with a program (like I have had with Norton’s!) and refuse to use it any more. But to get on this screamin’ meemie bandwagon about a product is a little more than ridiculous. Most all of these forums are nothing more than a bunch of whiny cry babies who can’t think of anything better to do with their time. That’s why I stick with The Lounge. We usually can say what we think and get on with it. We ought to drop this before it goes any further. McAfee, with all of its warts and possible shortcomings, is as good a product as any other. I would prefer lots of improvements in it, but one has to take what the man has to offer. Let’s go on to something else, OK?

I could use a little advice about ZA when you get the time!

Reply | Quote

Without dissatisfaction about existing products, advertising-driven consumer capitalism as we know it would be impossible! The advent of the Internet as a place to whine is just a natural extension of the coffee shop, the public square, the water cooler, etc. We need to be civil about our disagreements in all of these contexts, no point in coming to blows over a $40 program, but we should not pretend that the real differences between the products are not important. On the other hand, generic epithets aren’t very helpful criticisms, so I agree that we don’t need to keep repeating them.

I can’t tell whether I’m agreeing with you or not, but that’s what I think. Also, I represent Trend Micro and we like its products.

Reply | Quote

[indent]

---

I can’t tell whether I’m agreeing with you or not, but that’s what I think.

---

[/indent]From the mouths of lawyers….

Well said, Jefferson. I would add that by no means should we begin a political discussion either.

Reply | Quote

Yeah guys, all I was trying to say to Dave is that this is a thread about Zone Alarm. He and I have both expressed our individual opinions about a couple of other products so we shouldn’t make the thread lose its meaning by continuing the diatribe. As one can tell from reading MANY of my posts, I’m just as inclined as the next person to express my free opinion about “stuff.” Let’s talk about Zone Alarm, OK?

Reply | Quote

Mark, can you qualify “suspicious file types” for me please? I am interested to know what Zone Alarm might pick up that the latest Norton system works and AV does not. Thank you.

Reply | Quote

If I may interject :
One thing a firewall like ZA will do that a VS will not is to prevent net access from within your system by unauthorised software.
This may be belt and braces, but I also run a little app called Script Sentry, which stops scripts such a *.vbs, js, and a host of others from executing immediately : they are stopped and you are asked if they are safe to run. I consider this important when you have the active content of web pages set to enable in IE, when you work in HTML based e-mail, or when Word and Excel macros are enabled. It also does away with the necessity for disabling svchost.exe
Not wishing to pre-empt Mark’s reply, but any file (or even text) that is executable, or contains executable content should be treated as inimical until proven otherwise. This includes files with the following extensions :
VBS, VBE, JS, JSE, WSH, WSF, SHA, SHB, HTA, REG, DOC, XLS

I would also consider as potential dangers :: *.exe, *.com, *.bat, HTML, e-mail attachments, or ANY file with a hidden extension. Use of the EVAL or EXECUTE functions to hide script.
It is far from easy to specify a line up to which surfing is safe and beyond which it isn’t. I mean, should you wish to be safe from harmful scripts, disable Windows Scripting Host svchost.exe. Unfortunately this also stops any active web page content from running, and some may not load at all. Rather a dull experience then?
Rgds

Reply | Quote

Of course you may interject, this has been very informative and helpful. I am one of “those” who has no clear concept of exactly what a firewall does apart from preventing someone gaining access to my machine remotely, right? As Nancy mentioned I am running 98, and have a machine that is already running slow and heavy, therefore I am hesitant to load anything that may slow it down further. I’ve been told freeware firewalls are useless, but cannot back that up either way since I have never tried one out.

I am grateful to Mark for starting this thread on the topic because it has helped me to understand a little about ZA and its uses. I get the impression most in this forum are online constantly? If so the need to protect machines would be absolutely necessary, what about if I am logging on only periodically for a couple of hours a day? Do you feel I need this type of protection? Thanks everyone.

Reply | Quote

[indent]

---

what about if I am logging on only periodically for a couple of hours a day? Do you feel I need this type of protection?

---

[/indent]
Well, that depends. Suppose you only cross the street once in awhile, instead of constantly. Would you still look both ways? Remember, you can still get the free version of ZA &, if you want, you don’t have to load it.

Reply | Quote

Thanks Phil, quite right Id no doubt get run over. Being rushed off my feet with work and travel, I probably run across the street without looking in either direction! When I read you’re reply, it made me realize my words could have been misconstrued, after all one cannot be a little bit pregnant, so Im off to grab that firewall at once!

Reply | Quote

And don’t forget, you don’t even necessarily have to UNINSTALL it if you need to do other stuff to tweak your system performance. Just un-check the box that says “Load ZoneAlarm At Startup.” (Assuming, of course, that ZA is the one you’re going to try out)

Reply | Quote

Hi Doc, yes it will be Zone Alarm I will try out, thanks for the instructions. I am even more “alarmed” having read you’re post relating to you’re own knob being probed! (Sorry, I have a wicked sense of humor, am I allowed to joke in here?). Re:- online 24/7, this is the case at work, no matter where in the world I am located (I move around lots), but at home I do use a simple DUN, dial up connection to log on as required, even though I could leave my machine online constantly, it would be wasted in an empty house and (I thought) more vulnurable.

Reply | Quote

Even though I didn’t start the thread I wanted to give you an analogy with firewalls.

Imagine walking through a motel hallway. As you go down the hallway, you jiggle every doorknob looking for an open door. If you find one, you go in and place a bug or tracking device somewhere. This is what the illicit folk of the world are doing with computers. Each door in the hallway is a “port” on your computer.

If you hard a ‘firewall’ in the motel, no one would even be able to go down the hallway unless a resident there gave them permission. The firewall effectively hides all the doors, and since you can’t get to them to begin with, for all intents and purposes they don’t even exist to you.

Freeware firewalls aren’t useless. Quite the contrary – whoever told you that was dead wrong. Freeware firewalls are every bit as effective as the ones you pay for – the difference is in the feature set. Some firewalls offer a lot of options and flexibility, bhut if you don’t know how to use them, why would you pay for it? A car with power windows and power locks costs more than one without – but if you’re not going to use the power windows or locks, why pay extra for them?

Chances are minimal that you’re going to slow anything down appreciably, but you can always remove the software if you do notice a slowdown.

Everyone on the internet, or any kind of computer network, will benefit from hiding the “doors” in their “motel.” If you’re using a persistent, always on connection such as cable or DSL, you’re at a higher risk of intrusion because you have a nice fat pipe for data, and you’re not breaking the connection until you power off the PC.

If I were you, I would try one of the products mentioned in this thread – the so-called “uesless freeware” – and if you don’t take a performance hit, consider yourself well protected. If adding a firewall does have a negative impact on your PC, it’s more likely because you need additional RAM, or to turn off some of the things that are running in the background already. But if it were me, I’d leave the doors locked/hidden and think about getting rid of something else that isn’t protecting you.

Reply | Quote

Hi Mark:
>>If you’re using a persistent, always on connection such as cable or DSL, you’re at a higher risk of intrusion because you have a nice fat pipe for data, and you’re not breaking the connection until you power off the PC.<<

I was under the impression that the above was true only for cable. I have DSL & I dial-up & disconnect several times a day. i.e. you can stay on all the time with DSL, but you don't have to, whereas for cable, you don't have a choice (if the power is on). Isn't that true?

Reply | Quote

Acutally, Phil, I think a lot of it depends on your individual provider. In my case, after a period of inactivity, you’re logged off – but for the hour or so in between, you’re still “on”. My DSL provider has a DSL modem, which then connects to the computer using standard CAT-5 cable. All I have to do is go to their special web page and log in.

Once upon a time when I had a cable modem, that was the case – the network was there, period. Either way, the main point is that you have a big data pipe and your computer can be used more effectively in a coordinated attack due to that faster network connection. There are a lot of people (myself included) who run their PCs 24×7, with that connection always enabled. I don’t want to find out how creative the hacker types have gotten – meaning, can they work around that little login thingy? I’d bet they can!

Reply | Quote

Man, I didn’t know that. My DSL connection is “hot” 24/7. I didn’t even realize there are providers where you login. And Mark, your motel analogy is a good one. As I mentioned in an earlier post, when I used to run BlackIce Defender, my computer reports showed multiple times per day when someone, somewhere in the world, was “trying my doorknob!” (probing)

Reply | Quote

Mark thanks for the brilliant analogy, you are an excellent teacher. Ill download one of those firewalls and take you’re suggestion of simply trying it out. Man I must be tired, of course I can simply uninstall the program if it slows my system further. WAY too much for this dumb blonde to cope with the obvious! I appreciate the info greatly.

Reply | Quote

In the absence of Dave, I figured what the heck! I downloaded and installed ZA and went through the initial permissions settings (browser, mailwasher, tardis, etc.). During that process, ZA told me that Messenger, SVCHOST.EXE and SERVICES.EXE were asking for permission to access the internet. Even though I don’t use Messenger, and I assume the other two (until I learn otherwise) are Win XP components, so I said OK. Anybody think I shouldn’t do this?

I put the IP addresses of my in-home machines and my NIC in “trusted” state (I don’t use DHCP) but later ZA was giving me a warning that my machine was trying to contact one of the DNS numbers of my ISP. I believe that must have been my Linksys router, so I added its IP address to my trusted zone and I’ll just watch to see if that solves it. Comments?

This may have been a fluke of Mozilla, but I don’t think so – I told ZA to go get the upgrade that Dave mentioned and while the download was running, I was reading the instruction for installation on the screen. They say to shutdown ZA prior to installing. Makes sense, but because I was reading, I didn’t notice how quickly the download seemed to finish. Turns out it ABORTED. Tried again – abort. Next time, I SHUTDOWN ZA prior to clicking the download button and it worked OK. For the information of it, the downloaded file name is ZASETUP3125.EXE, but when you install it you really are getting version 3.1.291

Reply | Quote

Hope all is well with all of your systems. My is still running just fine and I did a upgrade vs. a clean install. All of my settings were retained.

AS for the screen shot, it was the one I had open at the time, as thoses that uising this new version you will see several different panes. I just wanted to show the new general layout.

I have been running ZA and Nortons on a 4 computer p2p networks for several years and have NOT had any problems. I don NOT know about McAffee, as I will not allow any product with that name on any of my systems. They get deleted if they come on a new machine.

DaveA I am so far behind, I think I am First
Genealogy....confusing the dead and annoying the living

Reply | Quote

I have installed it and it is up & running. Upgrade was denied as servers were busy and directed to try later. Tried every hour for 7 hours and same response, so I suppose I will try later tonight when traffic reduced. Seems to be working pretty good, although I have noticed my page loads are slower. There are a few things that I was trying to learn, but help often sent me to the ZA site to but another product. I guess I will figure it out.

Al ~ I disabled the e-mail scanning and will just let AVG handle that.

Reply | Quote

Correction – sorry Dave, I see you (not Mark) started the thread on ZA, so thank you for introducing the topic it has been a real education.

Reply | Quote