Router Firewall

WaxiesDargle

Bill Thanks for that...I got this from the results...seems ok..er apart from the first one!!

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif,MS Sans Serif][SIZE=-1][SIZE=+1]Please Stand By. . .

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif,MS Sans Serif][SIZE=+0]Attempting connection to your computer. . .
[SIZE=-1]Shields UP! is now attempting to contact the Hidden Internet Server within your PC. It is likely that no one has told you that your own personal computer may now be functioning as an Internet Server with neither your knowledge nor your permission. And that it may be serving up all or many of your personal files for reading, writing, modification and [/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif,MS Sans Serif][SIZE=+0][SIZE=-1]even deletion by anyone, anywhere, on the Internet!

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif,MS Sans Serif][SIZE=+0]Your Internet port 139 does not appear to exist!
[SIZE=-1]One or more ports on this system are operating in FULL STEALTH MODE! Standard Internet behavior requires port connection attempts to be answered with a success or refusal response. Therefore, only an attempt to connect to a nonexistent computer results in no response of either kind. But YOUR computer has DELIBERATELY CHOSEN NOT TO RESPOND (that's very cool!) which represents advanced computer and port stealthing capabilities. A machine configured in this fashion is well hardened to Internet NetBIOS attack and intrusion.

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif,MS Sans Serif][SIZE=+0]Unable to connect with NetBIOS to your computer.
[SIZE=-1]All attempts to get any information from your computer have FAILED. (This is very uncommon for a Windows networking-based PC.) Relative to vulnerabilities from Windows networking, this computer appears to be VERY SECURE since it is NOT exposing ANY of its internal NetBIOS networking

[/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT]and..


[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif,MS Sans Serif][SIZE=-1][FONT=courier new,courier]GRC Port Authority Report created on UTC: 2009-12-30 at 15:46:09

Results from scan of ports: 0, 21-23, 25, 79, 80, 110, 113,
119, 135, 139, 143, 389, 443, 445,
1002, 1024-1030, 1720, 5000

0 Ports Open
0 Ports Closed
26 Ports Stealth

---

26 Ports Tested

ALL PORTS tested were found to be: STEALTH.

TruStealth: PASSED - ALL tested ports were STEALTH,
- NO unsolicited packets were received,
- NO Ping reply (ICMP Echo) was received.
[/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]

davb

WaxiesDargle wrote: »

Bill Thanks for that...I got this from the results...seems ok..er apart from the first one!!

No, it's all good - the first one is just information on what could happen. The actual results are fine, and show your firewall is working correctly

You just need to check wireless encryption is on now - a good indicator would be if you had to enter a passphrase on the laptops to allow them to connect.

computershack

davb wrote: »

I wouldn't rely on a basic firewall such as NAT. Firstly it will respond to port scans, and thus get onto hacker try lists. Secondly, it won't give anything like the same degree of protection as it's not doing any active blocking.

Yawn...care to come up with something more relevent than out of date stuff from half a decade ago? Yes it may respond to ICMP requests (virtually all are set not to on WAN) but all that does is to say there's a connection there, not what inbound services are being run.

Yes, it won't give anything like the same degree of protection on OUTBOUND connections but for inbound, its rock solid. Can't route something to the right computer if you've not set up a rule to tell it which local IP to forward data for a particular port to....

WaxiesDargle

Thanks dave

when I got this...- Ensure encryption is enabled and the encryption code is enabled.
- Select Apply.

It was enabled

davb

computershack wrote: »

Yawn...care to come up with something more relevent than out of date stuff from half a decade ago? Yes it may respond to ICMP requests (virtually all are set not to on WAN) but all that does is to say there's a connection there, not what inbound services are being run.

Yes, it won't give anything like the same degree of protection on OUTBOUND connections but for inbound, its rock solid. Can't route something to the right computer if you've not set up a rule to tell it which local IP to forward data for a particular port to....

The trouble is that people do tell it which internal IP to look for when they set up port forwarding or DMZ.