firewall without all the bloat
Sir Psycho
Now that Kerio Personal Firewall has gotten all bloated up im looking
for an alternative.
One of its handy fetaures was that it told you what program wanted to
connect out, what protocol it used, what port and allowed you to create
rules based on these connections.
Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
Thank you all
jm...@webace.com.au
> Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
Comodo Personal Firewall
http://www.comodogroup.com/products/free_products.html
FAQ
http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,894.0.html
Flash tutorial ( You may have to use IE )
http://www.embsolutions.com.au/cpf_rule/
http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,395.0.html
How to Protect your wifi-Lan
http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,361.0.html
Forums
http://forums.comodo.com/
John Corliss
I still use Kerio version 2.1.5 to good effect.
--
Regards from John Corliss. I don't reply to trolls like Andy Mabbett.
No ad, cd, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, PROmotion, share, spy,
time-limited or trial wares or warez for me, please.
Bob
> Sir Psycho wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Now that Kerio Personal Firewall has gotten all bloated up im looking
>> for an alternative.
>>
>> One of its handy fetaures was that it told you what program wanted to
>> connect out, what protocol it used, what port and allowed you to create
>> rules based on these connections.
>>
>> Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
>>
>> Thank you all
>
> I still use Kerio version 2.1.5 to good effect.
>
Bob
Sir Psycho
Kerio 2.1.5 is nice but dosent get along well with Visual Studio. All I
need is something to tell me what apps are connecting out and if i want
to block them with some rules as well.
I guess Ill have to stick to the older version of Kerio. Thanks anyway
peoples :)
prophet
> Kerio 2.1.5 is nice but dosent get along well with Visual Studio. All I
> need is something to tell me what apps are connecting out and if i want
> to block them with some rules as well.
>
> I guess Ill have to stick to the older version of Kerio. Thanks anyway
> peoples :)
If you haven't tried it already, I find Sygate 5.6 to be a good compromise.
You can find it at http://www.oldversion.com/program.php?n=sygate
Robert Larder
>>>
>>> Thank you all
>>
>> I still use Kerio version 2.1.5 to good effect.
>>
> It's been said many times before but it is difficult to beat Zone Alarm
> Free
> Bob
That`s what I thought until I updated it about 6 weeks ago, I forget the
details now, but it upset my system. I uninstalled, and all returned to
normal, reinstalled ( the updated version) and it was screwed again. I`m now
running Safety.Net from http://www.netveda.com/ which works fine.
Bob Larder
Sir Psycho
badgolferman
<44f43c28$0$920$edfa...@dread12.news.tele.dk> wrote:
> That`s what I thought until I updated it about 6 weeks ago, I forget
> the details now, but it upset my system. I uninstalled, and all
> returned to normal, reinstalled ( the updated version) and it was
> screwed again. I`m now running Safety.Net from
> http://www.netveda.com/ which works fine.
This looks interesting. Do you use the other features it offers also?
Robert Larder
"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:xn0eqjnsi...@news.readfreenews.net...
> Robert Larder, 8/29/2006, 9:08:28 AM,
>> screwed again. I`m now running Safety.Net from
>> http://www.netveda.com/ which works fine.
>
> This looks interesting. Do you use the other features it offers also?
Nah....... probably would, were I not too dumb to figger it out ;-)
Bob Larder
El Gee
news:44f42c8f$0$4512$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl:
I have been using it for about 3 years or so...maybe longer. I have
been quite pleased. (yes I know it has been discontinued).
Zone Alarm was a resource hog when I used it 3+ years ago.
Kerio, I never tried.
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
El Gee Www.mistergeek.com <><
Know Christ, Know Peace -- No Christ, No Peace
Remove .yourhat to reply
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Bear Bottoms
Ashampoo...it's the best right now. http://bearbottoms1.com
--
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Bear Bottoms
Bear Bottoms
Comodo bundles freakware with their products...do a search
badgolferman
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 03:06:02 -0500, Sir Psycho
> <totalharmon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi there,
> >
> > Now that Kerio Personal Firewall has gotten all bloated up im
> > looking for an alternative.
> >
> > One of its handy fetaures was that it told you what program wanted
> > to connect out, what protocol it used, what port and allowed you to
> > create rules based on these connections.
> >
> > Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
> >
> > Thank you all
> >
>
> Ashampoo...it's the best right now. http://bearbottoms1.com
Why is it the best? Is there an independant review of this software?
Bear Bottoms
Do you have search capability? It just went free...they are trying to
boost their visibility...it has a small footprint...and does a great job.
It is the best currently. Zone alarm used to be...that changed several
times. Now it is Ashampoo.
badgolferman
Well, all the reviews I see are from individuals commenting on the
interface. There is zip information on how well it actually protects.
I am interested in actual comparisons to other firewalls.
Bear Bottoms
<REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, I've compared it to competetors and I find it much better
than anything currently. I was one of the first subscribers to
Gibson Research...started with zone alarm free, bought it, left
it, tried sunbelt's kerio and found it seriously lacking in quality
compared to Ashampoo. My vote goes to Ashampoo.
Jackie
t need a "personal firewall."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Bear Bottoms
> Buy a good NAT router, configure it correctly, put your box behind it,
> run a free antivirus, and keep your OS patched and don't run strange
> tings or MSIE/OE and you won'
> t need a "personal firewall."
>
That's is good enough if you stay on the safe side as you say. If you
like to take a walk on the "wild side" occassionally, use virtual surfing
products. I find the best is Sandboxie.
SandBoxie - Run your Web browser inside the sandbox. This way any
incoming, unsolicited software (spyware, malware and the like) that you
download, is trapped in the sandbox. Changes made to your list of
Favorites or Bookmarks, hijacking of your preferred start page, new and
unwanted icons on your desktop -- all these, and more, are trapped in and
bound to the sandbox. You could try a new toolbar add-on, browser
extension or just about any kind of software. If you don't like it, you
throw away the sandbox by closing the session, and start again with a
fresh sandbox. On the other hand, if you do like the new piece of
software, you can re-install it outside the sandbox so it becomes a
permanent part of your system. Sandboxie intercepts changes to both your
files and registry settings, making it virtually impossible for any
software to reach outside the sandbox. Sandboxie traps cached browser
items into the sandbox as a by-product of normal operation, so when you
throw away the sandbox, all the history records and other side-effects of
your browsing disappear as well. Very easy to use, install and when you
run the program from it's Sandboxie icon, it opens your default browser
and your inside the sand box. The only way you can tell your in the sand
box, is the fact you ran your browser by clicking the SandBoxie icon. You
can also run other kinds of programs that go to the Internet inside the
sandbox.
SECURITY PROFILE TOP 10:
1. Always surf virtually – come out when you need to save something.
2. Use a top rated Firewall.
3. Use a suite of the top rated security software – ask.
4. Routinely backup your important data files.
5. Perform routine on-line virus scans – from several sites.
6. Post HighJackThis logs frequently on Tech Support sites.
7. Schedule scandisk and defrag of your hard drive regularly.
8. Have installation CD's to install Windows (boot version) on a wiped
clean harddrive.
9. Have installation CD's of your Commercial Software.
10. Maintain a list of your Commercial, Open Source and Freeware programs.
I run behind two routers and a firewall as well as virtual surf and a host
of
anti-malware programs. I walk on the wild side a bunch...safely.
Comodo
that's just so untrue!!!!
Please get your facts right before you make any suggestions about any
product.
Melih
Bear Bottoms
Not my facts ... I link the article:
http://www.emailbattles.com/2006/05/12/security_aadgdfdddh_ah/
--
I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
> "Bear Bottoms" <bearbo...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>> Well, I've compared it to competetors and I find it much better
>> than anything currently. I was one of the first subscribers to
>> Gibson Research...started with zone alarm free, bought it, left
>> it, tried sunbelt's kerio and found it seriously lacking in quality
>> compared to Ashampoo. My vote goes to Ashampoo.
>
> Based on what criteria? Based on what independent tests, reviews and
> comparisons? There aren't any. Ashampoo is a brandnew firewall, v.
> 1.0, so it has no proven track record either. Ergo, you are
> bullshitting.
>
> Zepos
Based on my independent tests, my review and comparison...that is 1.
I wouldn't shit you, your my favorite.... :)
John Corliss
> Bear Bottoms wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 03:55:57 -0500, <jm...@webace.com.au> wrote:
>>
>>> Sir Psycho wrote:
>>>> Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
>>> Comodo Personal Firewall
>>> http://www.comodogroup.com/products/free_products.html
>>> FAQ
>>> http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,894.0.html
>>> Flash tutorial ( You may have to use IE )
>>> http://www.embsolutions.com.au/cpf_rule/
>>> http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,395.0.html
>>> How to Protect your wifi-Lan
>>> http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,361.0.html
>>> Forums
>>> http://forums.comodo.com/
>>>
>> Comodo bundles freakware with their products...do a search
>
> Please get your facts right before you make any suggestions about any
> product.
I agree. If somebody is going to make such a claim, they should provide
links to sites providing information about such concerns. I haven't
tried Commodo yet, but I do know that PC Magazine thinks quite highly of it:
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1969485,00.asp
I find it doubtful they'd feel that way if "freakware" was bundled with it.
John Corliss
> Comodo wrote:
>> Bear Bottoms wrote:
>>>> Sir Psycho wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
>>>>
>>>> Comodo Personal Firewall
>>>> http://www.comodogroup.com/products/free_products.html
>>>> FAQ
>>>> http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,894.0.html
>>>> Flash tutorial ( You may have to use IE )
>>>> http://www.embsolutions.com.au/cpf_rule/
>>>> http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,395.0.html
>>>> How to Protect your wifi-Lan
>>>> http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,361.0.html
>>>> Forums
>>>> http://forums.comodo.com/
>>>
>>> Comodo bundles freakware with their products...do a search
>>
>> Please get your facts right before you make any suggestions about any
>> product.
>
> http://www.emailbattles.com/2006/05/12/security_aadgdfdddh_ah/
>
> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
Thanks for providing that link (the emailbattles one).
Allan Higdon
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 03:06:02 -0500, Sir Psycho
> <totalharmon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> Now that Kerio Personal Firewall has gotten all bloated up im looking
>> for an alternative.
>>
>> One of its handy fetaures was that it told you what program wanted to
>> connect out, what protocol it used, what port and allowed you to create
>> rules based on these connections.
>>
>> Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
>>
>> Thank you all
>>
>
> Ashampoo...it's the best right now. http://bearbottoms1.com
>
I tried it out myself.
When I used the ShieldsUp site (Common Ports), the ports were mostly Closed, with a few actually Open.
No Stealth at all.
A post from "Justme" on 8/24 mentioned the same result.
--
"Truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it."
~ Flannery O'Connor
"The moral rot of political correctness runs deep today in both national parties."
~ Patrick J. Buchanan
Al Klein
>Buy a good NAT router, configure it correctly, put your box behind it, run a free antivirus, and keep your OS patched and don't run strange tings or MSIE/OE and you won'
>t need a "personal firewall."
Well ... maybe for the occasional program that slips through that
phones home. But with a good router you won't need a firewall for
incoming connections.
Rick Merrill
> Buy a good NAT router, configure it correctly, put your box behind it, run a free antivirus, and keep your OS patched and don't run strange tings or MSIE/OE and you won'
> t need a "personal firewall."
>
unless you want to run FTP service ...
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
I posted a link, but here it is again:
http://www.emailbattles.com/2006/05/12/security_aadgdfdddh_ah/
The question is: does comodo include bundled software that does something
other than what a firewall does? It seems they do. Some may think it
harmless. I don't want any bundles and who knows what it really does.
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
> Bear Bottoms wrote:
Your welcome. I'm not interested in any "bundles" regardless
of what the claim is. When I first saw it, I almost jumped for
joy...then the bombshell. Who really knows what it does?
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:18:45 -0500, Bear Bottoms <bearbo...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 03:06:02 -0500, Sir Psycho
>> <totalharmon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> Now that Kerio Personal Firewall has gotten all bloated up im looking
>>> for an alternative.
>>>
>>> One of its handy fetaures was that it told you what program wanted to
>>> connect out, what protocol it used, what port and allowed you to create
>>> rules based on these connections.
>>>
>>> Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
>>>
>>> Thank you all
>>>
>>
>> Ashampoo...it's the best right now. http://bearbottoms1.com
>>
>
> I tried it out myself.
> When I used the ShieldsUp site (Common Ports), the ports were mostly
> Closed, with a few actually Open.
> No Stealth at all.
> A post from "Justme" on 8/24 mentioned the same result.
>
I ran Gibson's stuff last night and was fully protected????
Bear Bottoms
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:18:45 -0500, Bear Bottoms <bearbo...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 03:06:02 -0500, Sir Psycho
>> <totalharmon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> Now that Kerio Personal Firewall has gotten all bloated up im looking
>>> for an alternative.
>>>
>>> One of its handy fetaures was that it told you what program wanted to
>>> connect out, what protocol it used, what port and allowed you to create
>>> rules based on these connections.
>>>
>>> Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
>>>
>>> Thank you all
>>>
>>
>> Ashampoo...it's the best right now. http://bearbottoms1.com
>>
>
> I tried it out myself.
> When I used the ShieldsUp site (Common Ports), the ports were mostly
> Closed, with a few actually Open.
> No Stealth at all.
> A post from "Justme" on 8/24 mentioned the same result.
>
>
>
I just ran the shields up and leak test again and am completely stealth.
Leak test 1.x failed.
I'm not sure what you are talking about and now am suspect.
Bear Bottoms
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 16:18:45 -0500, Bear Bottoms <bearbo...@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 03:06:02 -0500, Sir Psycho
>> <totalharmon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> Now that Kerio Personal Firewall has gotten all bloated up im looking
>>> for an alternative.
>>>
>>> One of its handy fetaures was that it told you what program wanted to
>>> connect out, what protocol it used, what port and allowed you to create
>>> rules based on these connections.
>>>
>>> Has anyone found something similar thats lightweight?
>>>
>>> Thank you all
>>>
>>
>> Ashampoo...it's the best right now. http://bearbottoms1.com
>>
>
> I tried it out myself.
> When I used the ShieldsUp site (Common Ports), the ports were mostly
> Closed, with a few actually Open.
> No Stealth at all.
> A post from "Justme" on 8/24 mentioned the same result.
>
I'm running the test again now:
File sharing:
Attempting connection to your computer. . .
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 even
deletion by anyone, anywhere, on the Internet!
Your Internet port 139 does not appear to exist!
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.
Unable to connect with NetBIOS to your computer.
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
protocol over the Internet.
Common Ports: all ports are stealth
All Service Ports: True Stealth Analysis: all ports are stealth
Messenger Spam: No return Browser header: Opera...we know the
answer...great.
It completely passed the Shields up test as stealth.
Now for the LEAK TEST (specific firewall test) "drum roll": leak test
1.x unable to connect.
So it passed all of the tests...what are you talking about????
Sauron
I think he might refer to this :
Ping Reply: RECEIVED (FAILED) — Your system REPLIED to our Ping (ICMP
Echo) requests, making it visible on the Internet. Most personal
firewalls can be configured to block, drop, and ignore such ping
requests in order to better hide systems from hackers. This is highly
recommended since "Ping" is among the oldest and most common methods
used to locate systems prior to further exploitation.
Run the test and this is the only thing that makes the test say True
stealth analysis failed.
--
A lawyer is a person who writes a 10,000 words documents and calls it a
"brief".
Bear Bottoms
Bear Bottoms
I passed both in true stealth...see above:
ShieldsUP! 45,054,203 system tests
The Internet's quickest, most popular, reliable and trusted, free Internet
security checkup and information service. And now in its Port Authority
Edition, it's also the most powerful and complete. Check your system here,
and begin learning about using the Internet safely.
LeakTest 6,337,863 downloads
Ensure that your PC's personal firewall can not be easily fooled by
malicious "Trojan" programs or viruses. Thanks to this first version of
LeakTest, most personal firewalls are now safe from such simple
exploitation.
Sauron
> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:19:52 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>
>
> and that test would be where?
>
>
Sorry forgot to mention : shields up common port test,also have to
mention that mcafee, kaspersky, jettico and so on have the same result
there.
Sauron
Strange, I got the same result as yesterday : Ping Reply : RECEIVED
(Failed).
But I think someone posted already something about this part of the test
in this ng some weeks ago, only can not find the message.
prophet
> When I used the ShieldsUp site (Common Ports), the ports were mostly Closed, with a few actually Open.
> No Stealth at all.
Don't focus too much on "Stealth". It's not the end of the world if your
ports are simply "Closed". An attacker can't do anything with/to a
closed port, but it does tell him that a machine is running at that
particular IP address and might make him want to scan all other ports
for vulnerabilities (which shouldn't be a problem if you configured your
system & firewall correctly).
John Fitzsimons
<bearbo...@gmai.com> wrote:
< snip >
>I posted a link, but here it is again:
>http://www.emailbattles.com/2006/05/12/security_aadgdfdddh_ah/
>The question is: does comodo include bundled software that does something
>other than what a firewall does? It seems they do. Some may think it
>harmless. I don't want any bundles and who knows what it really does.
Exactly. IF the "LaunchPad" is as "innocent" as suggested then Comodo
would respond to people's complaints and remove it. Their not wanting
to suggests that there may be something going on that isn't being
disclosed.
Regards, John.
Al Klein
>Jackie wrote:
Why can't you run FTP with a router?
Comodo
John
I do not know what your motives are, but on many occassions I have made
it clear that we asked our users about what they want to do with
Launchpad here http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,201.0.html
and we will carry out whatever they decide! as simple as that!
Your negative insinuations, without any factual basis, about our
product is not appreciated. If you got proof about something make it
public! Otherwise pls be reasonable and don't spread FUD!
Melih
Allan Higdon
Here's what I'm talking about.
The following is the results from selecting the "Text Summary" button after the Common Ports test:
GRC Port Authority Report created on UTC: 2006-08-31 at 19:43:05
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
2 Ports Open
24 Ports Closed
0 Ports Stealth
---------------------
26 Ports Tested
NO PORTS were found to be STEALTH.
Ports found to be OPEN were: 135, 445
Other than what is listed above, all ports are CLOSED.
TruStealth: FAILED - NOT all tested ports were STEALTH,
- NO unsolicited packets were received,
- A PING REPLY (ICMP Echo) WAS RECEIVED.
I would like Ashampoo to work correctly, as I do like the GUI.
Al Smith
>>> would respond to people's complaints and remove it. Their not wanting
>>> to suggests that there may be something going on that isn't being
>>> disclosed.
>>>
>>> Regards, John.
>
>
> John
>
> I do not know what your motives are, but on many occassions I have made
> it clear that we asked our users about what they want to do with
> Launchpad here http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,201.0.html
>
> and we will carry out whatever they decide! as simple as that!
>
> Your negative insinuations, without any factual basis, about our
> product is not appreciated. If you got proof about something make it
> public! Otherwise pls be reasonable and don't spread FUD!
>
> Melih
>
Reasonable enough. I'll looking forward to the elimination of
Launch Pad at the earliest possible time. It is dead weight on my
computer. I can't get rid of it without losing the icon in the
tray that lets me know Comodo is running ... and while I'm on the
subject, how about making that icon a little more informative, so
that it shows incoming and outgoing traffic?
In_Parentheses
news:1157052659.8...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:
Melih,
Following the accusations back-and-forth now for quite some time here, I
wonder whether you haven't come up with the idea to make the complete
source of that Launchpad available for the programmers here to look at?
The mere fact that you (Comodo) insist of bundling the Launchpad with any
of your products, without offering the possibility of letting the enduser
decide whether or not this by-product should be installed is, to say the
least, suspicious. And please don't tell us that the Launchpad "is fully
integrated" into the functionality of your products, that type of BS has
been tried before in the past by a company much bigger than yours... and
they lost!
I think you have to understand the sentiments of the subscribers to acf in
matters of "bundled software", *and* you have to be willing to acknowledge
these sentiments... at least, if you are interested in distributing your
programs as freeware and get (much like Grisoft) free advertizing for your
company! Also the fact thst you don't disclose the extra program needed
(the Launchpad) on the web site isn't in your advantage, it reminds a lot
of people of bundled spyware. Melih, being open about the program, sharing
the source, would be in your advantage; the way you act now isn't. As admin
of two domains you should be able to understand that!
The way you act now, and did in the past, makes that there is, and will
remain, a shadow of suspicion on your programs, how well written and good
they may be.
--
Jay
(IP)
Goeroeboeroe
says...
very, very, very, very little bit, you should know that in the nex
release Launchpad is not running anymore, but the choice is to the user.
This next release is planned for today, so maybe it's already out.
I have twenty years of experience with security, and I wish eveery
company would listen to its users the way Comodo does.
I don't mind if you have critics on Comodo, but what you say is
outdated.
By the way: I don't get paid by Comodo, I just think their firewall is
state-of-the-art. Just as I think their Antivirus is not yet ready for
everyday use.
Peter
Bear Bottoms
> Bear Bottoms schreef:
>> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:19:52 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>> and that test would be where?
>> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
>
> Sorry forgot to mention : shields up common port test,also have to
> mention that mcafee, kaspersky, jettico and so on have the same result
> there.
>
>
I ran those tests and got complete stealth...I think you may have other
secrutity issues that may not have anything to do with a firewall?
Al Smith
>>> matters of "bundled software", *and* you have to be willing to acknowledge
>>> these sentiments... at least, if you are interested in distributing your
>>> programs as freeware and get (much like Grisoft) free advertizing for your
>>> company! Also the fact thst you don't disclose the extra program needed
>>> (the Launchpad) on the web site isn't in your advantage, it reminds a lot
>>> of people of bundled spyware. Melih, being open about the program, sharing
>>> the source, would be in your advantage; the way you act now isn't. As admin
>>> of two domains you should be able to understand that!
>>>
>>> The way you act now, and did in the past, makes that there is, and will
>>> remain, a shadow of suspicion on your programs, how well written and good
>>> they may be.
>>>
>>>
>
> If you had followed the discussions in the forum of Comodo for just a
> very, very, very, very little bit, you should know that in the nex
> release Launchpad is not running anymore, but the choice is to the user.
> This next release is planned for today, so maybe it's already out.
> I have twenty years of experience with security, and I wish eveery
> company would listen to its users the way Comodo does.
> I don't mind if you have critics on Comodo, but what you say is
> outdated.
> By the way: I don't get paid by Comodo, I just think their firewall is
> state-of-the-art. Just as I think their Antivirus is not yet ready for
> everyday use.
>
> Peter
I've been running Comodo for a few weeks, and I just uninstalled
it. I've been getting a little hourglass popping up on my cursor
from time to time. At first I thought it was the AOL Antivirus,
but when I uninstalled that, the hourglass was still there. It's
gone now. It must have been caused by Comodo and Launch Pad. Too
bad, I liked Comodo. But Sygate seems very good, also.
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
I think you have other security issues beyond a firewall. I tested
completely stealth and am using Ashampoo. But I have taken many other
security steps with my computer to insure everything is closed as best
as possible.
Allan Higdon
>
> I think you have other security issues beyond a firewall. I tested
> completely stealth and am using Ashampoo. But I have taken many other
> security steps with my computer to insure everything is closed as best
> as possible.
>
I have also taken other security steps, such as disabling many of the unnecessary services, according to BlackViper's site.
As a comparison, I exited from Ashampoo and restarted Windows XP firewall.
Here's the "Text Summary" for it:
GRC Port Authority Report created on UTC: 2006-08-31 at 20:41:12
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.
Apparently, this firewall works fine, as does Sygate.
In_Parentheses
news:MPG.1f61776b7...@newszilla.xs4all.nl:
Hi Peter,
No I haven't; if I have to run to every forum to see the result of each
discussion here, then I would have little time left to actually read the
posts here! Reason enough for me not to do so.
BTW: I was replying to Melih, he seems a man very well capable of writing
his own defense, if you don't mind me saying so. "Outdated" eh, well,
Melih's reply was just like his replies in the past, and in that context
my reply to him wasn't "outdated" at all, but perhaps you read something
in it, I didn't put in there?
Your BTW: If you don't live in Manchester (UK), I believe you ;-D
--
Jay
(IP)
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 16:55:15 -0500, Bear Bottoms <bearbo...@gmai.com>
Get Advanced Windows Care and install and run it...see if that doesn't help
http://www.iobit.com/
The issue your having has nothing to do with Ashampoo.
Bear Bottoms
When I first saw Comodo firewall...I thought it was a dream come true.
Then the bundled software issue came up and I backed off. This is the
current state, not outdated. Let us know when the new unbundled release
is ready and I will give it a go.
John Fitzsimons
>John Fitzsimons wrote:
>> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 17:51:44 -0500, "Bear Bottoms"
>> <bearbo...@gmai.com> wrote:
>> < snip >
>> >I posted a link, but here it is again:
>> >http://www.emailbattles.com/2006/05/12/security_aadgdfdddh_ah/
>> >The question is: does comodo include bundled software that does something
>> >other than what a firewall does? It seems they do. Some may think it
>> >harmless. I don't want any bundles and who knows what it really does.
>> Exactly. IF the "LaunchPad" is as "innocent" as suggested then Comodo
>> would respond to people's complaints and remove it. Their not wanting
>> to suggests that there may be something going on that isn't being
>> disclosed.
>> Regards, John.
>John
>I do not know what your motives are, but on many occassions I have made
>it clear that we asked our users about what they want to do with
>Launchpad here http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,201.0.html
The majority of people who have joined your forums will obviously be
people who do not have a problem with it. If people have a problem
with your program and/or LaunchPad then the majority of them would
just go elsewhere.
>and we will carry out whatever they decide! as simple as that!
>Your negative insinuations, without any factual basis, about our
>product is not appreciated. If you got proof about something make it
>public! Otherwise pls be reasonable and don't spread FUD!
>Melih
Sorry. "Trust us" isn't sufficient for some of us here. People like
Microsoft, Sony etc. have said the same thing and now have class
actions being taken against them for secret actions that their
software made on people's computers.
It is absurdly easy to prove that LaunchPad is "innocent". Either get
rid of it or provide users with a way to not install it.
Regards, John.
Goeroeboeroe
says...
Hi Parent,
If I read my post again I was a bit too unfriendly, sorry. Probably
because I live in Amsterdam, that's even worse than Manchester. Comodo
refuses to pay people living in Amsterdam :o)
I just get a little tired of a lot of people saying or suggesting
there's spyware in the firewall or launchpad without any knowledge about
it, just because some anti-spyware-firms in the past made some mistakes
about another program of Comodo. Most of them have corrected that.
And since ZoneAlarm seems to have completely mad there are less and less
good free firewalls.
If you have a little bit of time I think you should really go once to
the firewall forum of Comodo, so you can see how people talked there
about that Launchpad (I hate it myself and have killed it completely, by
the way). Almost everybody didn't like it, so it's going to be changed.
The main reason I get sometimes so angry about this is I'm afraid people
without too much knowledge just don't try this firewall and install some
piece of crap just because it has 'firewall' in the name. I've seen that
happening already.
Peter (friendly again :o)
Bear Bottoms
Comodo has bundled software (Launch Pad) simple as that. When that is
gone,
people will try it. Why can't you understand that? Let us know when
Launch
pad doesn't install with the program and no other bundles are present.
Sauron
Nope no other security issues, system is clean.
Bear Bottoms
> Bear Bottoms schreef:
>> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 05:04:28 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>>
>>> Bear Bottoms schreef:
>>>> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:19:52 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>>>> and that test would be where?
>>>> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
>>>
>>> Sorry forgot to mention : shields up common port test,also have to
>>> mention that mcafee, kaspersky, jettico and so on have the same result
>>> there.
>>>
>>>
>> I ran those tests and got complete stealth...I think you may have other
>> secrutity issues that may not have anything to do with a firewall?
>> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
>
> Nope no other security issues, system is clean.
>
Well it must be something else. I'm using Ashampoo and get a totally
clean report from GRC. If it was Ashampoo...I would be getting the same
as you and I'm not.????
In_Parentheses
news:MPG.1f6188505...@newszilla.xs4all.nl:
Hi Peter,
I was friendly all the time; I don't believe in flaming. Amsterdam, eh?
Well, I guess you can't help it <LOL>. Serious again...
I agree with you that we are getting thin on good firewalls, but in the
same token: That doesn't mean you (or "we" in this context) have to believe
everything the companies say; in the past the most horrible malware has
been distributed that way!
Comodo's firewall already has been downloaded, and the activation key has
been received; and I will give it a fair chance, but there will be a packet
sniffer on-line with it, and in case of the slightest irregularity...
they'll be fried to a crisp ;-), launchpad, or no launchpad, active! In
case it works as it should, I will tell it here too, but that could take
some time, as these tests can be quite lengthy.
--
Jay (friendly all the way :o) )
(IP)
»Q«
> I do not know what your motives are, but on many occassions I have
> made it clear that we asked our users about what they want to do
> with Launchpad here
> http://forums.comodo.com/index.php/topic,201.0.html
>
> and we will carry out whatever they decide! as simple as that!
AFAICT, every time you have been asked about what Launchpad does and
why it is bundled without the option not to install it, you have not
answered but only invited people to your forum to discuss it. I don't
have any idea whether Launchpad is good, bad, or ugly, but I'm pretty
sure that if you won't answer questions about it here, people here will
continue to be suspicious of it. If all you want is to make your forum
users happy, posting answers only there is fine. If you want to
satisfy people in a.c.f as well, the only way to do it is to post
answers here also.
--
»Q«
In_Parentheses
62rZnZ2dnU...@scarlet.biz:
> Bear Bottoms schreef:
>> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 05:04:28 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>>
>>> Bear Bottoms schreef:
>>>> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:19:52 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>>>> and that test would be where?
>>>> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
>>>
>>> Sorry forgot to mention : shields up common port test,also have to
>>> mention that mcafee, kaspersky, jettico and so on have the same result
>>> there.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I ran those tests and got complete stealth...I think you may have other
>> secrutity issues that may not have anything to do with a firewall?
>>
>> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
>
> Nope no other security issues, system is clean.
>
May the Valar protect us, Sauron is here ;-)
S. you write that the system is clean, what tests did you do to get to this
knowledge? Did you:
* do an AV-scan?
* do a Trojan-scan (A-squared)?
* do a Root-kit detection scan (Sophos and/or SysInternal's)?
* do a spyware check with AdAware/Spybot?
Also, does Ashampoo report why these ports are open (iow: Which programs
keep them open)?
--
Jay
(IP)
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
Lets see...I don't use A-squared, Sophos or AdAware. I do use a host of
programs
which scan actively and passively for Trojans, worms, root-kits, all forms
of malware
and anti-virus defined and behavior based scans. Those would be AVG
anti-virus, Ewido,
Windows Defender, Spyware Blaster, Advanced Windows Care, Ashampoo
Firewall and
Prevx Home. I'm also behind two routers. I also use occassional online
scans from Panda, Kaspersky, and Trend Micro.
I also post HighJackThis logs regularly on some tech forums to get
"professional" reviews.
I also occassionaly run CWShredder. I also use virutal surfing (Sandboxie)
when I surf on
the wild side. GRC gives me the highest security rating.
Search and read about how to close your ports. It is not Ashampoo causing
your issues.
If it were, I would be getting the same as you...I don't.
Comodo
you will see that your statement above is not true
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/browse_thread/thread/8a40c609cc084cf/eb27ceb3bd5b0bd1?lnk=st&q=comodo+firewall+launchpad&rnum=3&hl=en#eb27ceb3bd5b0bd1
pls check the others ngs where i have explained the reasons many times
before. the above is one example.
The reason why I refer people to forums is because, all the arguments
have already been made and all the explanations have already been made
and decision about launchpad's future already has been reached by its
users. Its all there, publicly available. No point in re-writing all
that hence why I refer to the link. If you think we haven't covered any
point about launchpad, we would love to hear from you! As you will see
our users are sophisticated and tech savvy users who know what they
want and what they need! And they have been great at helping Comodo
shape its firewall!
Melih
Bear Bottoms
Comodo made a mistake bundling Launch Pad (and who knows what else) into
their software...and especially not being up front about it. The cat was
let out of the bag. Now your saying they are going to eliminate it. Own
up to this!
Comodo
The issue is not about what features user like or dislike and the ones
they don't like is a mistake etc.
Its about calling launchpad suspicious and bad!
So far, not a single person who can prove that it does bad things, cos
it does not!
there are people, with no authority, no testing, who never used or
tested CPF, no real facts to base their statement on is making throw
away comments and spreading FUD!
That's plain wrong and unfair! Especially for a company who is trying
to do their best in helping secure everyone for free!
You are funny suggesting that we "own up" to it, what do you think we
are doing by letting our users choose! :-)
Melih
Sauron
> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 18:51:57 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>
>> Bear Bottoms schreef:
>>> On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 05:04:28 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bear Bottoms schreef:
>>>>> On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:19:52 -0500, Sauron <Sau...@dontfeed.me> wrote:
>>>>> and that test would be where?
>>>>> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
>>>>
>>>> Sorry forgot to mention : shields up common port test,also have to
>>>> mention that mcafee, kaspersky, jettico and so on have the same
>>>> result there.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> I ran those tests and got complete stealth...I think you may have other
>>> secrutity issues that may not have anything to do with a firewall?
>>> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
>>
>> Nope no other security issues, system is clean.
>>
> Well it must be something else. I'm using Ashampoo and get a totally
> clean report from GRC. If it was Ashampoo...I would be getting the same
> as you and I'm not.????
>
>
> --I research freeware http://bearbottoms1.com
You know what is strange? I replaced Ashampoo by the firewall we also
use at work and now i passed the test, complete stealth.
Comodo
BTW: Do you even know what Launchpad does?
You are very vocal about a product that you have not used/tested and
don't know exactly what it does! :-)
And why are you, without even knowing what our product is about, making
insinuations , what are you trying to gain?
You claim to do research, so go ahead and do your research on CPF and
tell us what bad things CPF does! Let the facts speak, not the FUD you
are so willing to spread.. This is an open challange to you ;-)
I am sure everyone would be interested in facts!!! Or.... isn't
revelaing the fact about CPF not so interesting for you? ;-)
Melih
Sauron
test complete stealth, and yes the scans you mentioned were done(not
with all of the programs you mentioned but similar ones), besides some
cookies nothing was found.
In_Parentheses
news:1157080868.8...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Wrong, Melih:
The first issue *is* that you don't disclose the existence of the
Launchpad, neither on COMMODOGROUPS.COM, or on TRUSTIX.ORG, the two
domains registered on your name!
The second issue is that you don't acknowledge the sentiments people have
here with bundled software. If there is FUD being spread, then you cause
it, this way.
The third issue is you that the only thing you do is point at your forum;
well *THIS* is our "forum"; the matters that are being discussed here
should be answered here, *not* somewhere else. It would only be a matter
of cutting and pasting the text from your forum into your newsreader in
reply mode, and you would be done... now is that so hard?
Oh, and it is equally "funny" to see how you ignored my direct reply to
you... felt uneasy about it?
Have a good day!
--
Jay
(IP)
Peter Seiler
In_Parentheses & bearbottoms & Goeroeboeroe & comodo &...
is it really a good idea always huge fullquoting again and again and
again? Please think about your usenet behavior.
THX in advance for your kind understanding.
--
by(e) PS
spam will be killed
In_Parentheses
news:op.te6ce6yljo4m88@c57jw11:
Hi Sauron,
Let's put one thing straight: I don't use Ashampoo; I replied to you to
see if you might have forgotten some kind of malware in your defenses,
and might have been infected by one (or more).
BTW: SpywareBlaster only works good in preventing from being infected
with spyware if the system is clean, you might need to download AdAware
SE free and run a scan after updating it...
--
Jay
(IP)
In_Parentheses
@mailinator.com:
> In_Parentheses - 01.09.2006 02:01 :
>
> In_Parentheses & bearbottoms & Goeroeboeroe & comodo &...
>
> is it really a good idea always huge fullquoting again and again and
> again? Please think about your usenet behavior.
>
> THX in advance for your kind understanding.
>
Ah, I already wondered when the "Quoting police" would come in. Peter:
you're boring, a PITA, and this is usenet alt (still unmoderated), so
either ignore the thread, or kill file me, but stop interefering with a
discussion if you have nothing to add to it!
Have an otherwise fine day!
--
Jay
(IP)
Bear Bottoms
I don't get it then. Why would I pass and you fail?
Goeroeboeroe
>
> Hi Peter,
>
> I was friendly all the time; I don't believe in flaming. Amsterdam, eh?
> Well, I guess you can't help it <LOL>. Serious again...
>
> I agree with you that we are getting thin on good firewalls, but in the
> same token: That doesn't mean you (or "we" in this context) have to believe
> everything the companies say; in the past the most horrible malware has
> been distributed that way!
>
> Comodo's firewall already has been downloaded, and the activation key has
> been received; and I will give it a fair chance, but there will be a packet
> sniffer on-line with it, and in case of the slightest irregularity...
> they'll be fried to a crisp ;-), launchpad, or no launchpad, active! In
> case it works as it should, I will tell it here too, but that could take
> some time, as these tests can be quite lengthy.
>
>
That's good, testing it! I'm not absolutely sure, but I think the beta
doesn't phone home at all, and the last stable version should only phone
home for updates.
If you find it does more than updating I'm the first one who would like
to hear that :o).
Peter
Goeroeboeroe
says...
> In_Parentheses - 01.09.2006 02:01 :
>
> In_Parentheses & bearbottoms & Goeroeboeroe & comodo &...
>
> is it really a good idea always huge fullquoting again and again and
> again? Please think about your usenet behavior.
>
> THX in advance for your kind understanding.
>
>
Bear Bottoms
I'm not playing games with you as you are with us. You evade every
question. Does Comodo bundle software with it's firewall? And not
come out up front with the fact?
Bear Bottoms
I'm done with you and most likely Comodo products. You are doing more
harm than good with your evasiveness and cute argument. I was willing
to give it a chance after they cleaned it up. Secret bundling is
suspicious and who knows what it really does. I don't want any of it.
I want to know up front what I am getting. You may be owning up to
it now after the fact (cat out of the bag). You sure didn't before the
fact.
Your evasiveness and refusal to directly, honestly and concisely answer
questions about what you are defending is disgusting.
Goeroeboeroe
says...
Eh, the discussion on the forum where Melih links to is four pages,
about twenty screens of text. That's a bit too much for posting here, I
think.
Peter
Sauron
Like i said strange but since it had the same results with other
firewalls i have to get into the logs to see what the firewall i now
have blocks that the other ones didn't. Every firewall was configured to
not to reply on that kind of ping (execpt Ashampoo that i have to
admit,i just installed it to see what it was like and did the test)so I
wonder also what caused the failure on that part of the test.
MLC
> Ah, I already wondered when the "Quoting police" would come in. Peter:
> you're boring, a PITA, and this is usenet alt (still unmoderated), so
> either ignore the thread, or kill file me, but stop interefering with a
> discussion if you have nothing to add to it!
Well, I'm boring you me too, but your laziness makes unreadable an
interesting thread. It's not about moderated or unmoderated group, it's
about not wasting bandwith, money, time, expecially for the few of us who
are still on dialup.
I think it shouldn't cost you too much to fulfill Peter's polite request,
which is also mine. Of course we can killfile or use other methods to avoid
this hassle, but maybe we'd rather read also your contribute to this
unmoderated _and_ well-mannered news group.
I still hope in your disposition to favour our request.
--
Maria Luisa C - 01/09/2006 13.13.36
Peter Seiler
>
> Ah, I already wondered when the "Quoting police" would come in. Peter:
> you're boring, a PITA, and this is usenet alt (still unmoderated), so
> either ignore the thread, or kill file me, but stop interefering with a
> discussion if you have nothing to add to it!
is yours an *argument* against mine?
> Have an otherwise fine day!
>
you too
In_Parentheses
news:MPG.1f6230e09...@newszilla.xs4all.nl:
Hi Peter,
Twenty screens, and we are supposed to read that? But he could have
summarized it here; but it easier to point to a forum, I guess. Imagine
if we all would have forums and we, when questions are put up here, would
point to our forum... acf would only consist of questions and links, no
answers! Am I glad that not everyone here has a forum! <LOL>
--
Jay
(IP)
In_Parentheses
Bon giorno Marie Luisa,
But someone plunging into this thread starting at your post wouldn't have
any clue whatsoever what this is all about, wouldn't they? The idea, in
contradiction to your statement of me/us being "lazy" is that newcomers
to this thread can reconstruct what this all is about from the message at
any point in the discussion; given the number of replies to it, and if
everyone would cut the post to what they were replying to, the thread
would be mutilated in a terrible way, and even worse to read.
BTW: Calling someone "lazy" is not exactly what I think of as being
polite, but perhaps the norm for that is different in your country.
BTW2: I am absolutely allergic to people telling me what to do, and what
I shouldn't, in these "unmoderated" newsgroups; and I must say that the
"moderation level" of acf has been quite high in the past, I just hope
that doesn't start all over again!
--
Jay
(IP)
In_Parentheses
> In_Parentheses - 01.09.2006 12:01 :
>>
>> Ah, I already wondered when the "Quoting police" would come in.
>> Peter: you're boring, a PITA, and this is usenet alt (still
>> unmoderated), so either ignore the thread, or kill file me, but stop
>> interefering with a discussion if you have nothing to add to it!
>
> is yours an *argument* against mine?
Just as much as yours is... and since you are *not* the moderator of
acf... (fill in the dots)
>
>> Have an otherwise fine day!
>>
>
> you too
Thank you very much, likewise!
--
Jay
(IP)
In_Parentheses
news:a15927f41c995b6dd...@news.pig.let:
> Once Upon A Time (on or around Fri, 1 Sep 2006 11:48:30 +0000 (UTC)),
> in alt.comp.freeware, "In_Parentheses" <quo...@demonstrand.um>, by way
> of Message-iD <Xns98314F...@85.31.186.76>, wrote:
>
>>Goeroeboeroe <zwitser1-re...@xs4all.nl> wrote in
>>news:MPG.1f6230e09...@newszilla.xs4all.nl:
>>
> [snip]
>>
>>Hi Peter,
>>
>>Twenty screens, and we are supposed to read that? But he could have
>>summarized it here; but it easier to point to a forum, I guess.
>>Imagine if we all would have forums and we, when questions are put up
>>here, would point to our forum... acf would only consist of questions
>>and links, no answers! Am I glad that not everyone here has a forum!
>><LOL>
>
>
> Old Usenet saying:
>
> "'Tis far better to have snipped too much than to never have snipped
> at all."
>
> Just my thoughts on this ongoing point : )
>
That was not the subject of this part of the thread, Vrodok... Now, being
"new" to this thread an only see this post... about which twenty screens
was I talking??? What forums??? For my ideas about all this, please read
my reply to Marie Luisa (MLC) in this thread.
Another "old saying": Never try to moderate when in an unmoderated group
;)
Have a fine day!
--
Jay
(IP)
In_Parentheses
news:MPG.1f622b3eb...@newszilla.xs4all.nl:
<small snip> ;)
>>
> Hi,
> That's good, testing it! I'm not absolutely sure, but I think the beta
> doesn't phone home at all, and the last stable version should only
> phone home for updates.
> If you find it does more than updating I'm the first one who would
> like to hear that :o).
>
> Peter
>
Hi Goeroe et all ;-)
Well, that was quite an adventure. Let me say this first: I downloaded CPF
yesterday, in the late afternoon.
When I installed it today, there was *no* choice to be made; Launchpad was
installed, and the sniffer showed quite some activity, both normal (update
checking), and encrypted.
Upon installation and reboot the system turned into a slug, and memory was
getting quite low (which it isn't usually). 2 MB for the updater; 1.5 MB
for the "agent" (Launchpad) and 13 MB for the firewall (where the rest of
the memory went... beats me; the 15-16 MB the system easily can handle,
SMC.exe (Sygate) takes 15 MB, and the system responds quite fast, so there
must be something else going on (and no, there wasn't any network activity
during all this).
Since there was an update, I updated and rebooted the system again; same
result: Launchpad was still active, no choice was displayed on the update.
This time the program managed to to bring the system almost to a full stop;
the packet sniffer came into "Program is not responding", and would start
only after theboth the firewall and the Launchpad had been closed (Exit).
I went to Add/Remove Pograms to uninstall it, but the "Change/Remove"
button was grayed out, so no luck there. Fortunately I had taken
precautions and the program will be gone soon.
I think I will stick to what I have for the time being.
--
Jay
(IP)
In_Parentheses
comes to usenet, and today he wrote in
news:2e390a9d0042e71b6...@news.pig.let:
>>Vrodok the Piglet lover <vro...@culvert.waadi.com> wrote in
>>news:a15927f41c995b6dd...@news.pig.let:
>>
> [snip]
>> about which twenty screens
>>was I talking???
> [snip]
>
> Hmmm. Those nearly twenty scroll-down screens, courtesy of the
> thumb-wheel on my Microsoft trackball?
>
>>
>>Another "old saying": Never try to moderate when in an unmoderated
>>group
>
> My dear 'In_Parentheses'; newsgroup "moderation", where such does not
> exist, within a given group, consists of re-chartering (small-chance
> of that happening) said group, to "moderator-only" condition. Availing
> a specific-group (or groups) of what, to a great-many people would be
> considered simply decency (not having to read-thru many, many lines of
> headers which bear little or no-relevence to a particular-point being
> commented-upon), is not considered "moderation" (except for the
> unfortunately growing number of people who take delight in irritating
> & wearing-down who wish merely to see & read something
> comprehensible).
>
>>;)
>>
>>Have a fine day!
>
> Likewise : )
>
Hi Vrodok,
OK... let's blame MS, they can handle it <LOL>.
The name is "Jay", thank you! As for the moderation part: Could be, but
AFAIK this group *still* is unmoderated, and as mentioned before: I'm
quite allergic to even the slightest attempt of moderating.
Now, I noticed that people are getting more and more upset when _their_
rules aren't followed by others... now who's to blame for that; the ones
that get "irritated", orthe ones who cause the irritation??? I think you
know my answer!
Have a nice weekend! :)
--
Jay
(IP)
»Q«
<news:1157077237.0...@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>:
> »Q« wrote:
>>
>> AFAICT, every time you have been asked about what Launchpad does
>> and why it is bundled without the option not to install it, you
>> have not answered but only invited people to your forum to
>> discuss it. I don't have any idea whether Launchpad is good,
>> bad, or ugly, but I'm pretty sure that if you won't answer
>> questions about it here, people here will continue to be
>> suspicious of it. If all you want is to make your forum users
>> happy, posting answers only there is fine. If you want to
>> satisfy people in a.c.f as well, the only way to do it is to post
>> answers here also.
>
> Q
>
> you will see that your statement above is not true
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.comp.freeware/browse_thread/thre
> ad/8a40c609cc084cf/eb27ceb3bd5b0bd1?lnk=st&q=comodo+firewall+launch
> pad&rnum=3&hl=en#eb27ceb3bd5b0bd1 pls check the others ngs where i
> have explained the reasons many times before. the above is one
> example.
The one example you cite does nothing to convince me that I had the
wrong impression, and I'm not interested in searching all of Usenet
to find out whether or not you answer the questions in other groups.
> The reason why I refer people to forums is because, all the
> arguments have already been made and all the explanations have
> already been made and decision about launchpad's future already
> has been reached by its users. Its all there, publicly available.
> No point in re-writing all that hence why I refer to the link.
Very few people would like to wade through twenty pages of your
users' arguments about what it does or doesn't do or should or
shouldn't do. If you want to convince people it's trustworthy,
you'd really have to type up a summary of what it does and why,
along with the plans you have for changing it based on the feedback
you've gotten. If you see that as a waste of time, I won't argue,
but you don't seem to be changing a lot of minds here with your current
methods.
> If you think we haven't covered any point about launchpad, we
> would love to hear from you!
You've just been hearing from me. I'm not one who's posted questions
for you, just one suggesting you answer them.
> As you will see our users are sophisticated and tech savvy users
> who know what they want and what they need! And they have been
> great at helping Comodo shape its firewall!
I don't doubt it, but it's irrelevant to solving the PR problem you
have at the moment here.
--
»Q«
Peter Seiler
Goeroeboeroe, THX, you are welcome
Peter Seiler
> Peter Seiler <pspr...@mailinator.com> wrote in
> news:44F808FC...@mailinator.com:
>
>> In_Parentheses - 01.09.2006 12:01 :
>>> Ah, I already wondered when the "Quoting police" would come in.
>>> Peter: you're boring, a PITA, and this is usenet alt (still
>>> unmoderated), so either ignore the thread, or kill file me, but stop
>>> interefering with a discussion if you have nothing to add to it!
>> is yours an *argument* against mine?
>
> Just as much as yours is... and since you are *not* the moderator of
> acf... (fill in the dots)
you are right: I'm NOT the moderator and would'nt be such one even if
this ng would be a moderated one. Beside wasting bandwidth etc. etc. in
case of much fullquoting again and again, often within minutely
responses, often additionally multi-x-posted, shorten the quotings is
not a rule but for some good reasons a common recommendation for a good
usenet behavior. And often you will find hundreds of fullquoting lines
where the poster only say "thanks". Fullquoting more than often only is
a pure lazyness(?). Ok, if you prefer fullquoting contrarely against the
common recommendation (see how to quote)...its really up to you. EOD.
Comodo
eh?
which PR problem?
There are no questions about launchpad, just unfounded opinions! I am
more than happy to answer any specific questions about the Launchpad!
BTW: For everyone who said we don't listen to our users : Today we
launched CPF v2.3 and it has the option to disable launchpad as was
requested by our users!
Melih
Bear Bottoms
I notice ya'll are snipping a bit?
It's good advice...just don't be too parental about it. Sometimes it is
also better to leave a good portion for reasons given.
In_Parentheses
Peter, a good evening to you!
Then I would suggest not to behave like one. One thing you cannot accuse
me of is X-posting, neither do I send my posts to the server with
hundreds of lines of the original messages quoted and just say "Thanks
you", or any other "one-liner".
So, EOD it is <By your command :)>
--
Jay
(IP)
Bear Bottoms
Are you certain v2.3.4 will allow users to disable Launch Pad?
Bear Bottoms
wrote:
I'm going to install it "inside Sandboxie" and see what happens. I heard
the
claim v2.3.4 was released today which gives the user an option to disable
Launch Pad.
If it doesn't, greys out the unistall, or uses up system resources, I will
delete the virtual
environment and it 'WILLBEGONE'.