| Forums -> New features requests -> Firewall required |
|
Reply |
New topic
|
| |
Rainer
Anonymous
|
|
15-08-2006 19:54 |
Hi Kreso,
I wouldn't use this tool if no firewall is built in. Enabling every contact/friend to full netork access seems far too risky to me (just think about the worms and M$ vulnerabilities coming up each day). I just successfully connected to port 445 of your computer. Do you have all the newest patches on your machine?
If you added that the prog was really worth having it...
Cheers, Rainer
|
| Reply with quote |
| |
kreso
Postings: 1534
Administrator
|
|
15-08-2006 19:56 |
You can always 'block' me. RIght-click on my contact icon and choose 'block'.
Well. I also think that you will not add just anyone to your contact list - only people you want to.
Kreso
|
| Reply with quote |
| |
|
| |
Rainer
Anonymous
|
|
15-08-2006 23:15 |
yeah, and I can use the builtin firewall of XPSP2 or 2K3 or some software firewall. unfortunately that blocked myself too when I needed to connect from another station to my computer.
So what I needed is either to be able to tell which "friend" will have which IP (so I could adjust the firewall to that) or to say which "friend" will have access to which ressources/ports.
Rainer
|
| Reply with quote |
| |
kreso
Postings: 1534
Administrator
|
|
15-08-2006 23:57 |
You mean like to have static IP instead of DHCP allocated for a peer? Yes, that will be added soon too.
Kreso
|
| Reply with quote |
| |
Rainer
Anonymous
|
|
16-08-2006 06:58 |
That's good news, Thanks Kreso. Quote:
Well. I also think that you will not add just anyone to your contact list - only people you want to.
Kreso
Just for clearification: This is not about paranoia. This is about infected machines joining a network. Once I worked for a company where the CFO (let's see him as trust worthy) infected the whole company by plugging his private laptop into the company network... Now have a look at your firewall logs (grep for 445/tcp for instance) and you know how many infected machines are out there... Rainer
|
| Reply with quote |
| |
|
| |
kreso
Postings: 1534
Administrator
|
|
16-08-2006 10:09 |
You know, this sounds like a good idea actually to isolate certain type of traffic. It would be very easy to block only certain ports since we have full control over the data.
Kreso
|
| Reply with quote |
| |
hobbes80
Operations Manager
Postings: 1
Newcomer
|
|
24-03-2009 14:55 |
Quote:
You know, this sounds like a good idea actually to isolate certain type of traffic. It would be very easy to block only certain ports since we have full control over the data.
Kreso
This feature would make the difference in deciding to use this as a connectivity solution for monitoring remote appliances for our customers. Right now, we use logmein to control them, and have been looking at hamachi. But we don't like the licensing costs and the "openness" of any client connecting to any client. from the central place we'd like to connect back, but we wouldn't them to connect to each other.
____________________________________
Connecting to PCs, one at a time.
|
| Reply with quote |
| |
kreso
Postings: 1534
Administrator
|
|
24-03-2009 16:37 |
This has been implemented in the meantime. Settings->Network->Firewall
Kreso
|
| Reply with quote |
| |
|
| |
