Re: The isps need to block by default. in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r7680435 en Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:54:48 EDT Tue, 24 Nov 2009 14:54:48 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7685208 skater29687 : I definetely agree with that. my system was just hosed up by a linksys driver, that was some how downloaded to my system. I use a wireless nic to access the net, and I would lose my connection every 5-15 minutes. I finally had todo some detective work, goto the linksys site, and download the old drivers. windows update is a great thing, but all updates should be closely screened before downloaded.
--
Custom 1000 mhz. AMD Athalon with 512 mb. Ram. weird geforce 2 video card ram fluctuates from 16-64 mb. 30 gb. hard drive. 8x dvd-rom/cd-rw drive. 56x Cd-Rom wireless linksys nic. 17 in. monitor. and to top it off a soundblaster live sound card!]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7685208 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 22:22:40 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7684745 Stumbles : I prefer to know what the updates are before hand.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7684745 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 21:28:56 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7684671 keyboard5684 : I have heard many friends say that they fear the updates.

I personally have never seen this happen, at least in the last year or so. I do remember back in the NT4.0 days with service packs toasting machines but I think Microsoft has done a pretty good job lately.

So you are toast if you do toast if you don't? I guess to me I would wan't to know about the updates but for the majority I think it is just better if it does it without saying a word.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7684671 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 21:20:53 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7681898 Stumbles :
said by keyboard5684 See Profile:


At some point people need to take responsibility for their selves and there actions (or inactions).



That is the truth.

said by keyboard5684 See Profile:

Automatic updates are an awesome future that makes it so simple to use.


Given the number of times Microsofts patches have, ummm, well hosed my system, automatic updates are not really the way to go.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7681898 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 16:22:00 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7681589 reub2000 :
quote:
Firewalling individual users based on what they want becomes a problem administratively. No one wants to see 10,000 lines in there firewall configuration.

That is a problem. I guess the other option is to have oems install personal firewalls and virus scanners on their computers. Whatever the solution is, it has to be something that the average user doesn't know exists, but that a more advanced users can easily disable.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7681589 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 15:53:21 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680663 NaturlBrnklr :
said by XSF See Profile:
O/Ses, particularly MS, should have Antivirus software installed by default.

you do realize that this would very much make things a monopoly. It would be the IE fiasco all over again, however this time a company like McAfee or Norton, whoever would be left out in O/S incorporating virus scanning, have deeper pockets and would really feel the need to fight as they see their business dwindle. It is not Microsofts problem that users dont want to run/update virus scanners for whatever reason. In fact, this whole worm would never had begun had users ever bothered to update their copy of windows. The OS company can only put so much into the software before they start to squeeze out other companies that make the same software and are unhappy. I mean all the fuss over browsers - free software mind you- imagine what happens when software that costs money gets involved.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680663 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 14:20:52 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680489 keyboard5684 : People complain if ISPs block ports and complain if they don't?

Believe it or not when port 135 was blocked at our ISP people complained. They also complained when it was not blocked.

If port 80 was blocked (so you could not run servers) people go nuts. People also complain about the fact that it was not blocked when code red was out.

At some point people need to take responsibility for their selves and there actions (or inactions). An ISP that blocks ports in the end reduces overall network performance and the access-lists becomes a maintenance problem.

Firewalling individual users based on what they want becomes a problem administratively. No one wants to see 10,000 lines in there firewall configuration.

People were warned with over 3 weeks advance notice that this could be a problem. Automatic updates are an awesome future that makes it so simple to use.

People are also told about having a firewall, especially with broadband access. A firewall these days is cheap, easy to implement, and effective. $50 for a hardware router/firewall is less than a modem and easy to install.

If you buy a car and never take it to get its oil changed is it the dealer that owes you a new car? Cars now have a light that comes on to remind you to get the oil changed yet some people still ignore it and never get it done.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680489 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 14:02:56 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680435 reub2000 : I don't think the isp should be liable for virus attacks, but they could sheild n00bs. And if you use more than aim and e-mail, you could ask them to not block any ports.

quote:
If ISP's start blocking known worm/virus ports, where does it end? They'll be constantly chasing new virus.


That's because there only blocking known viri under ur idea.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680435 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:58:09 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680359 rradina : I disagree. ISPs shouldn't block ports unless a particular virus/worm is affecting their network's viability. In these cases, it should be a temporary block that's removed after the storm.

If ISP's start blocking known worm/virus ports, where does it end? They'll be constantly chasing new virus. Plus, if they become involved in preventing a virus from spreading, they may be partially liable or responsible if they don't stop future attacks.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680359 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:49:46 EDT Re: The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680141 XSF : O/Ses, particularly MS, should have Antivirus software installed by default.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7680141 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:22:25 EDT The isps need to block by default. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7679140 reub2000 : The isps need to block certain ports by default. The avergae user doesn't know what a port is, and doesn't care that their computer is insecure.

And if you wanted to do something, or had a firewall yourself, you could call and have your isp remove the firewall.
[text was edited by author 2003-08-14 11:30:21]
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,7679140 Thu, 14 Aug 2003 11:29:30 EDT