Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firewall

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • converge
    replied
    Originally posted by stringslayer
    Holy shit. Who the fuck cares already!
    ... appearantly the people that replied?


    Originally posted by stringslayer
    I dont believe I made some sort of factual declaration.
    ... as pointed out in Mr. CotMan's reply.


    Originally posted by stringslayer
    It was merely my opinion. I dont give a shit if you agree or not.
    ... this emotional post seems to show the contrary.


    Originally posted by stringslayer
    My whole damn point to begin with was simple.
    ... spitting out a buzzline and arguing a point are two different things. It appears you're not to fond of people that point out you're buzzlines are foolish.


    Originally posted by stringslayer
    If all I have is an Internet connection and a single computer, would I trust Windows more than Linux/Unix? Hell no.
    ... Excellent. ... and hopefully you don't trust Linux/Unix more than Windows either.


    Originally posted by stringslayer
    You disagree with that? Flame on ~
    I think this reply will count as a flame.. but I'm a mod, so I get a monthly 'Flame the Tard' card mailed to me. I've been saving up.


    Originally posted by stringslayer
    Dont bother replying cause I am done with this forum.
    ... ... and yet you were so helpful .. err .. entertaining.


    Originally posted by stringslayer
    I am truely sorry I ever visited this script kiddie haven to begin with. I have better things to do.
    ... I think the 'script kiddie' thing is getting kind of old. I vote for a change in vernacular.. how about something like 'STFU pot' .. or 'you fucking scenekettle'


    Originally posted by stringslayer
    Oh and by way--How can you type a long paragraph like that and still say nothing?
    It's called grammar. They teach it in school. You string words together and they form more complex thoughts than 'Windoze is for lusers, teehee'. When coupled with knowledge, it can actually make for interesting reading. The tricky part is being able to actually understand it. *shrug*


    -- AND --

    On this happyfuntag note, this thread is closed. It sucks. If you don't know what firewall to use by now, you're probably fucked. Since Defcon was cancelled, you'll just have to figure something out for yourself.

    Leave a comment:


  • Second
    replied
    Originally posted by gen0c1de
    I have been using Sygate personal firewall for about 1.5 years now with no problem. But the setup I have the sygate firewall is only used to protect the internet from me.

    Internet <---------->Smoothwall <--------->Sygate<------>Computer

    This setup has worked very well for me and I have yet to have a single problem.
    Haha, good way to defuse a tense situation!

    :)

    Leave a comment:


  • gen0c1de
    replied
    I have been using Sygate personal firewall for about 1.5 years now with no problem. But the setup I have the sygate firewall is only used to protect the internet from me.

    Internet <---------->Smoothwall <--------->Sygate<------>Computer

    This setup has worked very well for me and I have yet to have a single problem.

    Leave a comment:


  • TwinVega
    replied
    Originally posted by stringslayer
    Dont bother replying cause I am done with this forum. .........
    Oh and by way--How can you type a long paragraph like that and still say nothing?
    Funny how you don't want him to reply but still ask a question...

    Leave a comment:


  • stringslayer
    replied
    Originally posted by TheCotMan
    Windows 95 is a common start base for when people started considering "Windows Security" as a specialization through which system security applications were packaged into applications that would not run in an DOS-only environment, but only run in the GUI, and used the registry.

    However, if you want to go with Windows NT, then I'll accept this path too...

    Even if we go with the earliest release of MS Windows NT (version 3.1) we still find it was after the first DefCon.(June 9-11, 1993) the claim is still false:

    Defcon Existed before Windows NT 3.1 was available according to Microsoft.
    As a result, Defcon existed before MS Windows NT 3.1 and this means the statement, "Without MS Windows there would not be a DefCon" is false.

    [added content:]
    [1]

    Also:
    DefCon is about more than Operating system -- let alone one operating system.
    If DefCon people were not talking about MS Windows, maybe they would talk about some Novell product or an IBM's OS/2 revision or MacOS.
    Holy shit. Who the fuck cares already!
    I dont believe I made some sort of factual declaration. It was merely my opinion. I dont give a shit if you agree or not.
    My whole damn point to begin with was simple.
    If all I have is an Internet connection and a single computer, would I trust Windows more than Linux/Unix? Hell no.
    You disagree with that? Flame on ~
    Dont bother replying cause I am done with this forum. I am truely sorry
    I ever visited this script kiddie haven to begin with. I have better things to do.
    Oh and by way--How can you type a long paragraph like that and still say nothing?

    Leave a comment:


  • stringslayer
    replied
    Whatever

    Originally posted by theprez98
    Please, please, please, stop typing "Windoze", it makes you look like you just learned to speak 1337.
    Move along

    Leave a comment:


  • TheCotMan
    replied
    Originally posted by stringslayer
    The first Windows OS did not arrive until NT Workstation.
    Windows 95 and 98 are simply GUI's with DOS hooks.
    Windows 95 is a common start base for when people started considering "Windows Security" as a specialization through which system security applications were packaged into applications that would not run in an DOS-only environment, but only run in the GUI, and used the registry.

    However, if you want to go with Windows NT, then I'll accept this path too...

    Even if we go with the earliest release of MS Windows NT (version 3.1) we still find it was after the first DefCon.(June 9-11, 1993) the claim is still false:

    Defcon Existed before Windows NT 3.1 was available according to Microsoft.
    As a result, Defcon existed before MS Windows NT 3.1 and this means the statement, "Without MS Windows there would not be a DefCon" is false.

    [added content:]
    [1]

    Also:
    DefCon is about more than Operating system -- let alone one operating system.
    If DefCon people were not talking about MS Windows, maybe they would talk about some Novell product or an IBM's OS/2 revision or MacOS.
    Last edited by TheCotMan; April 3, 2005, 00:35.

    Leave a comment:


  • theprez98
    replied
    Please, please, please, stop typing "Windoze", it makes you look like you just learned to speak 1337.

    Leave a comment:


  • stringslayer
    replied
    If we are being technical,,,,

    The first Windows OS did not arrive until NT Workstation.
    Windows 95 and 98 are simply GUI's with DOS hooks.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheCotMan
    replied
    Originally posted by enCode
    I'm not much for opposition, but i dont think that you could say that.
    Well, the user can say that but it does not make their statement true. (What I expect you meant in your statement was the user's statement was false.)

    Consider the math to prove what I think you mean:
    Defcon 13 is in 2005.
    ...
    Defcon 1 is in 1993.

    Windows 95 was available as a beta and early release in 1994.

    Windows 3.11 was really just a GUI application-suite addition to MS-DOS, so "windows security" for it would really be "MS-DOS security" not "Windows security."

    DefCon preceeded windows security, and it existed before there was such a thing.

    Therefore, stating, "DefCon would not exist if it were not for Windows," is a false statement, and what I think you meant to say is entirely true.

    [added content]
    More can be said if you look at the history of DefCon and the reason cited for the very first DefCon.
    Last edited by TheCotMan; April 2, 2005, 11:33.

    Leave a comment:


  • enCode
    replied
    Originally posted by stringslayer
    Hell, I would go as far to say that if Windoze was really secure, there probably wouldn't even be a DefCon. If there was, there sure wouldn't be much to talk about.
    I'm not much for opposition, but i dont think that you could say that. Simply put, DefCon is about hacking. My definition of hacking is satisfying ones curiousity through exploration and exparimentation. You dont need to have computers to have curiousity.

    Leave a comment:


  • TheCotMan
    replied
    Originally posted by Chris
    "There is no such thing as a "secure" Windoze box."
    This statement is true. So true, that "windoze" can be omitted or replaced with another OS and still be true.

    Leave a comment:


  • stringslayer
    replied
    Too busy for April Fools jokes

    I have take my kids down to the burger joint for some freedom fries~

    Leave a comment:


  • Second
    replied
    Originally posted by stringslayer
    Have no desire to dive into any variation of OSx. (real or not)

    Chris- I will refrain from cursing at you because I do not believe it is called for and it is not what DefCon is all about.
    However, you seem to have trouble reading English, nevermind understanding computer science.
    There are no administrators who rely on Windoze security. If they do, yourself included, they are dead wrong.
    I agree with you that there are admins who prefer windows. I know a few of them.
    However, even they have a Pix on the edge and in front of the DMZ. Again, they are not relying on Windoze security at that point.
    Hell, I would go as far to say that if Windoze was really secure, there probably wouldn't even be a DefCon. If there was, there sure wouldn't be much to talk about.

    No, I do not or never will claim to be 1337. It's more about the journey to achieve 1337 that inspires me.
    Besides, if you are 1337, there is nothing left to learn. Wouldn't that be boring!

    Quick man! Say April Fool's and save yourself!

    :)

    Leave a comment:


  • stringslayer
    replied
    Windows Firewall

    Have no desire to dive into any variation of OSx. (real or not)

    Chris- I will refrain from cursing at you because I do not believe it is called for and it is not what DefCon is all about.
    However, you seem to have trouble reading English, nevermind understanding computer science.
    There are no administrators who rely on Windoze security. If they do, yourself included, they are dead wrong.
    I agree with you that there are admins who prefer windows. I know a few of them.
    However, even they have a Pix on the edge and in front of the DMZ. Again, they are not relying on Windoze security at that point.
    Hell, I would go as far to say that if Windoze was really secure, there probably wouldn't even be a DefCon. If there was, there sure wouldn't be much to talk about.

    No, I do not or never will claim to be 1337. It's more about the journey to achieve 1337 that inspires me.
    Besides, if you are 1337, there is nothing left to learn. Wouldn't that be boring!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X