Firewall

[James Wilkinson]

Tony Arnold wrote:
> I may also be right in saying that  firewall will quietly drop any
> incoming packets it is blocking whereas a system that just has no
> services listening may actually respond to the initial connection packet
> with a reset packet. There is a potential risk of a DoS from somewhere
> and hackers can also use this to finger print your system and conclude
> what OS you are running and direct attacks accordingly. So a firewall is
> safer.

You're right there, at least for firestarter (and the other Linux
firewall's I've used).

One place to check is at grc.com. Steve Gibson, the person behind it,
is -- how do I put this politely -- self-confident? Exuberant?
Over-states his position to the point it becomes controversial?

But his "Shields Up!" online tool does show some useful stuff. The site
checks it has your permission (and checks you are authorised to give
that permission) then scans your PC. And it will tell you which ports
you have open, which closed, and which your PC just drops (he calls it
"stealthed").

Just don't pay too much attention to the blurb. It's not the end of the
world if your site responds to pings.

And the risk of a DoS against a system with nothing listening is not
non-existent. But it's pretty small.

James.
-- 
E-mail address: james | "We've just been contacted by the Lady of the Lake."
@westexe.demon.co.uk  | "Really? What does she want?"
                      | "A really big towel."
                      |     -- http://www.mopsy.com/d/19981122.html