Steve Gibson's DNS Benchmark tool.
John Corliss
Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it. Definitely a
keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS servers too (takes a
little over a half hour.) VERY nice little tool.
http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
--
John Corliss BS206. Because of all the Googlespam, I block almost all
posts sent through Google Groups:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/
I also block as many posts from anonymous remailers and services as
possible (for example, aioe.org, alt.net [Altopia], dizum.com,
frell.theremailer.net, mixmaster.*, tioat.net, usenet4all.se,
x-privat.org) due to forgeries and other trolling posted through them.
No ad, CD, commercial, cripple, demo, nag, share, spy, time-limited,
trial or web wares OR warez for me, please.
Slarty
> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little utility.
> Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it. Definitely a
> keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS servers too (takes a
> little over a half hour.) VERY nice little tool.
>
> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes!
Mike Easter
If we translate that into 'Beware of Greeks (even when they are) bearing
gifts' or transliterate it into 'Beware of geeks bearing gifts' since
Steve Gibson is definitely a geek rather than a Greek - it still does
not compute.
Steve Gibson's numerous free and useful tools aren't something to
'beware'. Some people take issue with his pay tool SpinRight and its
promotion, but most testimony supports that tool as well.
So you are going to have to do better than throwing some meaningless
Latin phrases around here if you expect your message to be understood.
--
Mike Easter
Shadow
wrote:
>For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little utility.
>Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it. Definitely a
>keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS servers too (takes a
>little over a half hour.) VERY nice little tool.
>
> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
"Cough !!"
Message-ID: <l04ha69gap1jmfbuq...@4ax.com>
Yes, I like it.
The geek directory:
http://www.grc.com/dev/R-and-D/
FWIW
[]'s
Zo
[ZO] presented the following explanation :
> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little utility. Just
> downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it. Definitely a keeper. Be
> sure to personalize the list of DNS servers too (takes a little over a half
> hour.) VERY nice little tool.
>
> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
Nice and "Boomer size" Thanks John!
--
Zo
Floppy" ------- When you run out of Polygrip.
John Corliss (ES)
Thank you, Mike. I couldn't have said it better myself.
John Corliss
> John Corlisswrote:
>
>> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little utility.
>> Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it. Definitely a
>> keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS servers too (takes a
>> little over a half hour.) VERY nice little tool.
>>
>> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
>
> "Cough !!"
> Message-ID:<l04ha69gap1jmfbuq...@4ax.com>
> Yes, I like it.
> The geek directory:
> http://www.grc.com/dev/R-and-D/
> FWIW
> []'s
Yes, you did mention it back on Oct. 3, 2010. I either didn't see the
message or forgot it. In any event, it certainly doesn't hurt anything
to mention such a nice little program more than once. 80)>
John Corliss
>
> [ZO] presented the following explanation :
>> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little
>> utility. Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it.
>> Definitely a keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS servers
>> too (takes a little over a half hour.) VERY nice little tool.
>>
>> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
>
> Nice and "Boomer size" Thanks John!
I had forgotten all about Boomer. I wonder where she is now.
Slarty
> Steve Gibson's numerous free and useful tools aren't something to
> 'beware'. Some people take issue with his pay tool SpinRight and its
> promotion, but most testimony supports that tool as well.
That's a matter of opinion, to which you are welcome, but nevertheless you
seem to have understood my somewhat cryptic message.
Once upon a time any educated person understood at least a little Latin,
and that was a very well known tag, but O tempore! O mores! :-)
Cheers,
Roy
Slarty
>> So you are going to have to do better than throwing some meaningless
>> Latin phrases around here if you expect your message to be understood.
>
> Thank you, Mike. I couldn't have said it better myself.
Do a little research on Mr Gibson and then decide for yourself.
Better do a 'leak test' first. :-)
Cheers,
Roy
Klaatu
> Zo wrote:
>>
>> [ZO] presented the following explanation :
>>> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little
>>> utility. Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it.
>>> Definitely a keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS servers
>>> too (takes a little over a half hour.) VERY nice little tool.
>>>
>>> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
>>
>> Nice and "Boomer size" Thanks John!
>
> I had forgotten all about Boomer. I wonder where she is now.
Wasn't she on Battlestar Galactica?
--
Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
Mark Blain
dneByAvDhVNrQn...@posted.ccountrynet:
> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little utility.
> Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it. Definitely a
> keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS servers too (takes a
> little over a half hour.) VERY nice little tool.
>
> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
After you personalize the list, definitely take the time to do the
followup "spoofability" test to make sure the servers you chose are safe,
just as Steve recommends after you run his program.
https://www.grc.com/dns/dns.htm
Dustin
news:8qquvh...@mid.individual.net:
> Slarty wrote:
>> John Corliss wrote:
>>
>>> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little
>>> utility. Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it.
>>> Definitely a keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS
>>> servers too (takes a little over a half hour.) VERY nice little
>>> tool.
>>>
>>> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
>>
>> Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes!
>
> If we translate that into 'Beware of Greeks (even when they are)
> bearing gifts' or transliterate it into 'Beware of geeks bearing
> gifts' since Steve Gibson is definitely a geek rather than a Greek -
> it still does not compute.
>
> Steve Gibson's numerous free and useful tools aren't something to
> 'beware'. Some people take issue with his pay tool SpinRight and its
> promotion, but most testimony supports that tool as well.
I can also vouch for spinrite. I've used it for years. Good software.
I can't think of anything Steve's released that wasn't.
--
Hackers are generally only very weakly motivated by conventional
rewards such as social approval or money. They tend to be attracted by
challenges and excited by interesting toys, and to judge the interest
of work or other activities in terms of the challenges offered and the
toys they get to play with.
John Corliss (ES)
> John Corliss (ES) wrote:
>
>>> So you are going to have to do better than throwing some meaningless
>>> Latin phrases around here if you expect your message to be understood.
>>
>> Thank you, Mike. I couldn't have said it better myself.
>
> Do a little research on Mr Gibson and then decide for yourself.
>
> Better do a 'leak test' first. :-)
Maybe you could help us all cut to the chase and list your objections to
Steve Gibson and his programs here? I, for one, have never seen the
slightest negative thing said about him. Maybe I'm missing something?
By the way, I'm running the Ghostery extension in Firefox and it didn't
pop up even one alert when I went to:
http://www.grc.com/default.htm
Telling me to do research YOUR viewpoint is nonsense and you know it.
*YOUR* views are invalid in any discussion until *YOU* provide
references to back them up.
John Corliss
> Mike Easter wrote:
>
>> Steve Gibson's numerous free and useful tools aren't something to
>> 'beware'. Some people take issue with his pay tool SpinRight and its
>> promotion, but most testimony supports that tool as well.
>
> That's a matter of opinion, to which you are welcome, but nevertheless you
http://www.translation-guide.com/free_online_translators.php?from=Latin&to=English
John Corliss
> John Corliss wrote:
>
>> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little utility.
>> Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it. Definitely a
>> keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS servers too (takes a
>> little over a half hour.) VERY nice little tool.
>>
>> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
>
> After you personalize the list, definitely take the time to do the
> followup "spoofability" test to make sure the servers you chose are safe,
> just as Steve recommends after you run his program.
> https://www.grc.com/dns/dns.htm
Thanks for the tip! For those who are wondering what Mark is talking
about, here's a link to the test:
https://www.grc.com/dns/dns.htm
Take careful note of the warnings about running the test though. Also,
be aware that (AFAIK) you can only check one dynamic name server at a time.
My ISP's DNS rated "Excellent" and it doesn't surprise me.
Ron May
<q34w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Maybe you could help us all cut to the chase and list your objections to
> Steve Gibson and his programs here? I, for one, have never seen the
> slightest negative thing said about him. Maybe I'm missing something?
Remember the "firewall troll(s)" that used to pop up here everytime
"outbound" firewalls were discyssed? It/they had serious issues about
Gibson's support of two way protection, often accusing him of being a
"snake oil salesman" (though IIRC, their criticisms didn't extend to Fred
Langa, Scot Finnie and others who espoused similar opinions on the topic).
--
Ron M.
Registered Linux User #511161
Ubuntu/Vista Dual Boot
»Q«
John Corliss (ES) <q34w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Slarty wrote:
> > John Corliss (ES) wrote:
> > Do a little research on Mr Gibson and then decide for yourself.
> >
> > Better do a 'leak test' first. :-)
>
> Maybe you could help us all cut to the chase and list your objections
> to Steve Gibson and his programs here? I, for one, have never seen
> the slightest negative thing said about him. Maybe I'm missing
> something?
>
> By the way, I'm running the Ghostery extension in Firefox and it
> didn't pop up even one alert when I went to:
>
> http://www.grc.com/default.htm
>
> Telling me to do research YOUR viewpoint is nonsense and you know it.
> *YOUR* views are invalid in any discussion until *YOU* provide
> references to back them up.
That's all true, but there have been ridiculous charges thrown at
Gibson over the years, and Slarty references a particularly insane one.
Gibson's leaktest was a simple proof of concept, to show one way the
software "firewalls" of the time could be bypassed if any attacker
could replace a commonly-used executable that was already whitelisted.
His simple PoC required the user to whitelist notepad.exe, then replace
notepad.exe with another executable.
Idiots assailed him on the grounds that no user would ever willingly
replace his notepad.exe with another executable.
At least one software "firewall" vendor actually hard-coded a block for
any file called notepad.exe then claimed that they had hardened their
product Gibson's "exploit". The morons jeered Gibson again, for
publishing a vulnerability that the morons thought was trivial to seal
up.
But his leaktest did provide the vendors with a loud wake-up call.
(Gibson's pretty loud himself, and tech bloggers spent a while shouting
about the whole thing.) Gibson's simple leaktest had pointed at a
whole host of tricksy ways to defeat "firewalls" that nobody had
bothered to think about before. So now everyone was publishing new
exploits, calling them "improved" leaktests, and vendors were
scrambling to improve their products as well as scrambling to combat
their PR nightmare.
Bloggers were putting up grid charts to show which "firewalls" failed
which "leaktests". Morons were downloading new "leaktests" and, more
ridiculously, *suites* of multiple "leaktests" packaged together. The
morons would run the tests and compare results and argue about which
"firewall" was doing best (or worst).
Gibson didn't bother looking for any more vulnerabilities after the very
simple one he had pointed out initially. Again, the morons jeered him
because his leaktest paled in comparison to the many, more sophisticated
"leaktests" now available. Clearly, as seen through the eyes of morons,
Gibson could not keep up with the elite hackers poking holes in
"firewalls".
In the end, Gibson again got a lot of publicity, software vendors
improved their products, and the group of morons added the episode to
their list of Gibson's alleged crimes.
As far as I can see, silly as their specific claims are, their
overall unhappiness with Gibson is mostly due to the way he writes.
He writes excited explanations of whatever he's into at the time;
he's good with explanations, but the explanations also read like
sales pitches. He tends to stress the notion that whatever he's on
about is a Big Deal. So morons set out to cut him down to size
while the rest of us just read what he has to say and move on.
The morons have a web site, with this story from their point of
view, along with some others. (I guess it was that web site Slarty
meant to point us to, but I don't have the URL.) The story about
WinXP's networking capability matches the leaktest one for silly
allegations.
John Corliss
> John Corliss (ES)wrote:
>>
>> Maybe you could help us all cut to the chase and list your objections to
>> Steve Gibson and his programs here? I, for one, have never seen the
>> slightest negative thing said about him. Maybe I'm missing something?
>
> Remember the "firewall troll(s)" that used to pop up here every time
> Gibson's support of two way protection, often accusing him of being a
> "snake oil salesman" (though IIRC, their criticisms didn't extend to Fred
> Langa, Scot Finnie and others who espoused similar opinions on the topic).
I thought I recognized the argument tactic:
1. make tons of unsubstantiated claims
2. when asked for proof, tell the other person to do the research
Next, I'll probably be told by Slarty that he can't help it if I'm
"incapable of understanding". Either that, or my request for
clarification will be totally ignored, as has been the case so far.
That's probably because he knows that if he gave me the reasons he
doesn't like Gibson, they would have to demonstrate his anti-software
outbound firewall stance, clearly identifying what I'm dealing with here.
Thanks for your help, Ron.
John Corliss
> John Corliss (ES) wrote:
>> Slarty wrote:
>>> John Corliss (ES) wrote:
>
>>> Do a little research on Mr Gibson and then decide for yourself.
>>>
>>> Better do a 'leak test' first. :-)
>>
>> Telling me to do research YOUR viewpoint is nonsense and you know it.
>> *YOUR* views are invalid in any discussion until *YOU* provide
>> references to back them up.
>
> That's all true, but there have been ridiculous charges thrown at
> Gibson over the years, and Slarty references a particularly insane one.
I'm sorry, but I have to admit that I didn't see Slarty reference
anything in particular. Did I miss something? Seriously.
That was too good a summary to remove. Thanks, �Q�.
Ron May
wrote:
> Thanks for your help, Ron.
YW
Shadow
>In <news:iidv9l$sjt$1...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>John Corliss (ES) <q34w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>Gibson's leaktest was a simple proof of concept, to show one way the
>software "firewalls" of the time could be bypassed if any attacker
>could replace a commonly-used executable that was already whitelisted.
>His simple PoC required the user to whitelist notepad.exe, then replace
>notepad.exe with another executable.
Leaktest did what any trojan does today. And woke people up to
the fact that outgoing traffic was way more important than incoming
traffic.
I suppose that's why XP firewall never blocked outgoing
traffic ... make it easier for the RIAA etc.
Linux people have never woken up to this fact. Very, very few
use any kind of application-based-rule firewall, so a javascript in a
web page can serve up the users personal data($thousands, $millions?),
while the OS (cents) is carefully shielded by complex iptables rules.
Nobody uses root to query data .... users do that.
[]'s
Follow-ups will be of the kind: I have nothing to hide, let
them, and XP firewall is all I use, there is no need for fads like
outgoing firewalls .... BB(TM)
H-Man
> Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote in
> news:8qquvh...@mid.individual.net:
>
>> Slarty wrote:
>>> John Corliss wrote:
>>>
>>>> For those of you who are not already aware of this nice little
>>>> utility. Just downloaded this little jewel last week and ran it.
>>>> Definitely a keeper. Be sure to personalize the list of DNS
>>>> servers too (takes a little over a half hour.) VERY nice little
>>>> tool.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.grc.com/dns/benchmark.htm
>>>
>>> Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes!
>>
>> If we translate that into 'Beware of Greeks (even when they are)
>> bearing gifts' or transliterate it into 'Beware of geeks bearing
>> gifts' since Steve Gibson is definitely a geek rather than a Greek -
>> it still does not compute.
>>
>> Steve Gibson's numerous free and useful tools aren't something to
>> 'beware'. Some people take issue with his pay tool SpinRight and its
>> promotion, but most testimony supports that tool as well.
>
> I can also vouch for spinrite. I've used it for years. Good software.
> I can't think of anything Steve's released that wasn't.
Me too. It was, for me, a very valuable tool in finding and verifying hard
drive errors. I haven't used it in some years now but at one time I found
it very useful.
--
HK
»Q«
John Corliss <q34w...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> »Q« wrote:
> > John Corliss (ES) wrote:
> >> Slarty wrote:
> >>> John Corliss (ES) wrote:
> >
> >>> Do a little research on Mr Gibson and then decide for yourself.
> >>>
> >>> Better do a 'leak test' first. :-)
> >>
> >> (snip)
> >> Telling me to do research YOUR viewpoint is nonsense and you know
> >> it. *YOUR* views are invalid in any discussion until *YOU* provide
> >> references to back them up.
> >
> > That's all true, but there have been ridiculous charges thrown at
> > Gibson over the years, and Slarty references a particularly insane
> > one.
>
> I'm sorry, but I have to admit that I didn't see Slarty reference
> anything in particular. Did I miss something? Seriously.
Slarty referenced "leak test" in particular, so I figured he bought
into the anti-Gibson insanity regarding leaktest and wanted to point
you towards that in particular.
John Corliss (ES)
Gotcha. Thanks for the clarification.
Bob Villa
I know what you are saying...in particular what person wouldn't design
a "test" that would not make "his" software "look" good.
"There is something rotten in the state of Denmark!"