# Security software for broadband.



## Ash (17 Jun 2007)

Now that our broadband is up and running, what security software (preferably free) should be sufficient to stay clear of Net related viruses and other problems?
Already installed is a firewall, Spybot and AdAware6.
Thanks.


----------



## DrMoriarty (18 Jun 2007)

I presume you're already running some sort of anti-virus program?  

See the Key Post: helpful links for a clean PC and Free software and tech support links for recommendations.


----------



## Sn@kebite (18 Jun 2007)

DrMoriarty said:


> I presume you're already running some sort of anti-virus program?



I've had BB for 7 months now and not once have i ran an anti-virus program. (maybe now is time to end the blissful ignorance & not take it for granted)
But i think it's the websites you visit which plays a big part on whether or not you get "attacked".

But then again i'm using a Server OS so i know they can't afford to have bugs etc.. in them or ppl won't like buying them for such high prices.

The only time my computer played up is when i got broadband first, i was (foolishly ) using IE and my computer slowed down and then the "blue screen of death" showed up, since then i've used opera and no probs since. Maybe my os has build in firewalls? Or is it the fact i have most of my ports closed in my modem settings?

_*EDIT*_: Actually that may be of interest to you Ash, close your unused ports in your modem setup, that will chop down the probability of a virus attack


----------



## DrMoriarty (18 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> I think it's the websites you visit which plays a big part on whether or not you get "attacked".


Someone could always mail you something...


----------



## sabre Man (18 Jun 2007)

AVG has free anti-virus.


----------



## ClubMan (18 Jun 2007)

Some more useful links from _Gizmo Richards_:

 [broken link removed]
[broken link removed]
 [broken link removed]
[broken link removed]

Lots more here:

[broken link removed]


----------



## Sn@kebite (18 Jun 2007)

I downloaded AVG and installed it. It says it's for scanning the computer, i was looking for one to run when im online which blocks 3rd parties, stops auto file executions etc... Is this not for that?


----------



## aircobra19 (18 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> ....But then again i'm using a Server OS ...



Having a server OS makes no difference to security. So whats the relevance of that?



Sn@kebite said:


> I downloaded AVG and installed it. It says it's for scanning the computer, i was looking for one to run when im online which blocks 3rd parties, stops auto file executions etc... Is this not for that?



You should take some time to learn the basics of security and how these things work. 

[broken link removed])
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malware
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spyware
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-virus_software


----------



## ClubMan (18 Jun 2007)

Which _AVG _- _Anti Virus _or _Anti Spyware_?


----------



## aircobra19 (18 Jun 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Which _AVG _- _Anti Virus _or _Anti Spyware_?



Theres one with Firewall aswell.


----------



## ClubMan (18 Jun 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> Theres one with Firewall aswell.


Not in their free range of tools I don't think?


----------



## Sn@kebite (18 Jun 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> Having a server OS makes no difference to security. So whats the relevance of that?


I presumed the built-in firewalls in a Server OS would be even _slightly_ more reliable than the usual WinXP? Being that a virus on this type of os could mean a company going down. Thats why they are much more expensive. And ive had more errors, crashes on xp and practically none on this os.



ClubMan said:


> Which _AVG _- _Anti Virus _or _Anti Spyware_?



It's the first one on that page: "AVG Internet Security 7.5" [broken link removed]


----------



## aircobra19 (18 Jun 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Not in their free range of tools I don't think?



True but quite often people download the free trials of the payware by accident. The sites are often designed (in my opinion) to nudge you toward the payware downloads unless you are vigilant. You can never be sure what people have installed.


----------



## aircobra19 (18 Jun 2007)

I've never used the AVG firewall is it any good. I used to use ZoneAlarm despite its quirks. I'm generally behind a hardware firewall though so i don't really need it unless I'm using a laptop away from home.


----------



## ClubMan (18 Jun 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> True but quite often people download the free trials of the payware by accident. The sites are often designed (in my opinion) to nudge you toward the payware downloads unless you are vigilant. You can never be sure what people have installed.


You're right - looks like _Sn@kebite _has downloaded an eval version of the commercial _AVG _security suite and not the free versions of the virus and malware tools.

Based on _Gizmo Richards' _[broken link removed]  I run _Comodo _rather than _ZoneAlarm _these days on my personal system but according to his tests no free firewall is as good as a commercial one. The free version of _Kerio _also looks like an interesting option.


----------



## aircobra19 (18 Jun 2007)

ClubMan said:


> You're right - looks like _Sn@kebite _has downloaded an eval version of the commercial _AVG _security suite and not the free versions of the virus and malware tools.



Done it myself before!

Confusing list isn't it. [broken link removed]
[broken link removed]


----------



## Sn@kebite (18 Jun 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> Confusing list isn't it. [broken link removed]
> [broken link removed]



Yes, very!!

I've just downloaded a torrent of Sophos, will give that a whirl


----------



## aircobra19 (18 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> Yes, very!!
> 
> I've just downloaded a torrent of Sophos, will give that a whirl



You've got a virus alright. Installeverythingitus.


----------



## sabre Man (18 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> I downloaded AVG and installed it. It says it's for scanning the computer, i was looking for one to run when im online which blocks 3rd parties, stops auto file executions etc... Is this not for that?



I use ZoneAlarm for that. It's a decent and free firewall.


----------



## HighFlier (19 Jun 2007)

I am amazed at the lack of security in most broadband installations.

I recently acquired a mobile phone with wi fi capability and since then I am picking up open networks all over the place. (4 in my apartment block alone.)

I am able to surf the net .Use my email and download large packages at will. I am not an expert but if I can do this what could someone who knows something about this do to the computers of those connected in such a fashion.

It seems all the eircom networks ask for a wep key for access but most of the others don't by default.

Happy browsing.


----------



## aircobra19 (19 Jun 2007)

Its illegal to use someone else network even if its unsecured...AFAIK

http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/pos...d-for-using-cafes-free-wifi-from-his-car.html


----------



## HighFlier (19 Jun 2007)

I'm not sure if it's illegal in ireland and in any case I use my own. I have however tested the networks shown as available and where possible identified and told the owners of their exposure.

My point is even if these openings do not allow access to the users computers the cost of data downloads depending on the package you are on could be huge if someone decided to use your network for serious data transmission. It seems to me that apart from eircom and commercial services in bars and hotels there is no security advice given by the loads of secondary operators providing this service.


----------



## Sn@kebite (19 Jun 2007)

sabre Man said:


> I use ZoneAlarm for that. It's a decent and free firewall.


Just a message to all!!

DON'T install ZoneAlarm, i did and o got the blue screen of death and every time i started the computer that happened, I had to restore an image, thank god i didn't have any files in C: i would have lost them all.


----------



## ClubMan (19 Jun 2007)

Could you not have booted into safe mode and done a _System Restore_?


----------



## carpedeum (19 Jun 2007)

I have just upgraded to a wireless router* at home to accomodate a couple of laptops with Centrino chips and to upgrade my home office. I am amazed at the number of unprotected WiFi networks accessible from my cul de sac. People could gate crash these and download GB's of data as well as carry on illegal activity recorded against the owner's ISP account. I have found the same in every area in Dublin, even IFSC, where some of the biggset banks in Europe are located.

As well as having a good physical firewall in the router, I took advice and *configured my router as follows*:-

Changed the deafult name of my router
Disabled the broadcast of the SSID
Confined access to the router by MAC address
Enabled WPA-PSK security option with a password key
While the above can be broken by sad techies with time to waste, it should do for the average home user or teleworker. All the settings can be accessed by reading the router manual. 

*If interested I bought a Netgear 108Mbps Range Max ADSL Modem Wireless Router Model DG834PN for 149.99 that came with a USB Adaptor from PC World. Running two laptops, a desktop Pc and an XBox sometimes simultaneously with no ill effects.... to date! It doesn't seem to work with a Nintendo DS.


----------



## ClubMan (19 Jun 2007)

carpedeum said:


> I am amazed at the number of unprotected WiFi networks accessible from my cul de sac.


Apart from the security issues you should probably also take steps to configure your own network to avoid interference from these neighbouring networks. For example use NetStumbler to survey which channels are used and how strong each neighbouring network is. Then choose the least busy channel of 1, 6 or 11 for your own. Same goes for other 2.4GHz interference (e.g. microwave ovens - usually only used intermittently but you never know, some baby monitors, _TV_/digi senders, some cordless phones etc.) although to survey these you might need a spectrum analyser which is usually more cost/hassle than it's worth for most people. See other threads on this topic for more info on potential sources of 2.4GHz interference and how to deal with them.


----------



## carpedeum (19 Jun 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Apart from the security issues you should probably also take steps to configure your own network to avoid interference from these neighbouring networks. .


 
Thanks Clubman. Sound advice.


----------



## aircobra19 (19 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> I presumed the built-in firewalls in a Server OS would be even _slightly_ more reliable than the usual WinXP? Being that a virus on this type of os could mean a company going down. Thats why they are much more expensive. And ive had more errors, crashes on xp and practically none on this os.



First I've heard about it. Whats the built in Firewall you were using?




Sn@kebite said:


> It's the first one on that page: "AVG Internet Security 7.5" [broken link removed]



That does have a firewall which will do SOME of the things you wanted.


----------



## aircobra19 (19 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> Just a message to all!!
> 
> DON'T install ZoneAlarm, i did and o got the blue screen of death and every time i started the computer that happened, I had to restore an image, thank god i didn't have any files in C: i would have lost them all.



I don't think your experience is that common to be honest. It could be your Server OS or you're "InstallEverythingistus" or any one of a 100 other things. 

ZoneAlarm it pretty robust in my experience. Though it used to struggle with dynamic IP's from ISP's when my machine awoke from powersaving. I think there was a hack to fix it. But since it doesn't work on Vista (when I last checked) so I've stopped using it.


----------



## aircobra19 (19 Jun 2007)

HighFlier said:


> ....even if these openings do not allow access to the users computers the cost of data downloads depending on the package you are on could be huge if someone decided to use your network for serious data transmission.....



Skype does something similar if you close the application but leave the service open. Your machine is used as a node for others.


----------



## Firefly (19 Jun 2007)

Most hack are written for Internet Explorer, so use something else. I use Netscape - free download in a few minutes and find it fab. No issues with attacks whatsoever. Mozilla is good too.


----------



## Sn@kebite (19 Jun 2007)

ClubMan said:


> Could you not have booted into safe mode and done a _System Restore_?



Yes i tried all that, nothing would work.



aircobra19 said:


> I don't think your experience is that common to be honest. It could be your Server OS or you're "InstallEverythingistus" or any one of a 100 other things.



Thats what i thought for a sec! 

I think i'll go with, "why fix it if it ain't broken?"  Afterall i have all my ports closed, and a built-in firewall (which i only found out about) on my linksys modem. Plus i have average experience of what files not to open. (i realise this contradicts all my posts in this thread lol) But i thought it might be good to run a firewall, I was wrong! Probably just my os.


----------



## aircobra19 (19 Jun 2007)

My Fav is the Firefox, especially with a few addons, like Adblock, inline dictionary etc.


----------



## Sn@kebite (19 Jun 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> First I've heard about it. Whats the built in Firewall you were using?



It's just the in-built WinXP firewall, although it's deactivated at the moment because it get's a bit annoying 

Some p2p, torrent programs have an option to "open ports on windows xp firewall" to make a socks connection possible. (and probably any other connection.) Otherwise they won't connect.


----------



## aircobra19 (19 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> It's just the in-built , although it's deactivated at the moment because it get's a bit annoying
> 
> Some p2p, torrent programs have an option to "open ports on windows xp firewall" to make a socks connection possible. (and probably any other connection.) Otherwise they won't connect.



XP SP2 and 2003 SP1 Fireall are the same AFAIK. 

Some torrent progs are malware. Be careful what you open for them.


----------



## Sn@kebite (19 Jun 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> XP SP2 and 2003 SP1 Fireall are the same AFAIK.


Yes thay are.



aircobra19 said:


> Some torrent progs are malware. Be careful what you open for them.


Yep i've never had a prob with eMule or Bittorrent i wouldn't risk any other ones. also mIRC is really friendly so i don't need to be careful of that.


----------



## z108 (19 Jun 2007)

h**p://www.microsoft.com/nz/athome/security/protect/windowsxp/print.htm


I'd recommend having a look at step 3 on this page,

In particular the part which states :

Computer Associates (12-month free trial) 
(h**p://www.my-etrust.com/microsoft/)

If someone was going to use torrents where the software is untested, its easier and safer instead  to obtain a serial number of a program e.g zonealarm and use it for free e.g here [broken link removed]
Journalists dont usually report this but it happens a lot.


----------



## aircobra19 (19 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> I presumed the built-in firewalls in a Server OS would be even _slightly_ more reliable than the usual WinXP? Being that a virus on this type of os could mean a company going down. Thats why they are much more expensive. And ive had more errors, crashes on xp and practically none on this os.
> 
> 
> 
> It's the first one on that page: "AVG Internet Security 7.5" [broken link removed]






Sn@kebite said:


> Yes thay are.



I don't get you. You are running an server OS because you think its firewall is better than XPs but now you say you know its the same firewall? That doesn't make sense. At the same time you are trying other firewall applications for what reason I can't figure out. Because they might be better? Do you just like installing software or something?


----------



## Sn@kebite (19 Jun 2007)

aircobra19 said:


> I don't get you. You are running an server OS because you think its firewall is better than XPs but now you say you know its the same firewall? That doesn't make sense. At the same time you are trying other firewall applications for what reason I can't figure out. Because they might be better? Do you just like installing software or something?



When you said they were the same (AFAYK), i did a google job and found out they are the same.
But i never said the firewall was the only reason I am using WinServer 2003.


----------



## zag (19 Jun 2007)

Some of the advice in this thread is just pure stupid - there's no other word for it.

The idea that not running a firewall because nothing bad has happened or it is too annoying is so . . . . early 1990s . . . that it's hard to think some people still believe this.  Add to this running somewhat doubtfull copies of licensed software, downloading and sharing files from/with the great unwashed out there on the internet.

Do you also leave your car and house unlocked because they haven't been done yet ?

It is certainly possible to have too much security on your machine - the cost of this is performance, the upside is . . . well, being secure.  Having too little security has the advantage that your machine isn't slowed down (marginal anyway) until some internet lowlife connects to an unsecure service on your machine or you download the latest piece of badness dressed up as something cool and it starts talking back to the owner.  Suddenly your machine starts going slow and you have contributed to the mess that is the internet today.  Maybe you think all your services are off - try 'netstat -a' at a DOS prompt and see what is listening.  Then try launching your P2P stuff and see what's listening now.

As for a server firewall being better than a workstation firewall - there's no logic there.  There are different reasons to protect servers than to protect workstations.  We protect our server with hardware firewalls precisely because we don't want to rely on the server based firewall.  We want the server to do server stuff and the firewall to do firewall stuff.


z


----------



## Sn@kebite (19 Jun 2007)

I agree!! 

Plus it seems to be going off-topic, i'm ignoring this thread now, or it's gonna turn into an argument.

I admit i was wrong about the server firewall fairy-tale


----------



## aircobra19 (19 Jun 2007)

Sn@kebite said:


> When you said they were the same (AFAYK), i did a google job and found out they are the same.
> But i never said the firewall was the only reason I am using WinServer 2003.



I really don't want to know. Its like the tip of an iceberg.


----------

