Norton Internet Security 2005 Personal Firewall slows down Windows XP startup

You don't answer my question which is either because you don't have a definition but then I don't know how you can write of "a different definition" or you don't want to tell me your definition.

Moreover, I don't see how you conclude from my question "What is your definition of firewall...?" that I think NAT routers fall short of whatever you think I think they should fall short of. Nor I said anything about being right or wrong. Since when people have to make such a huge fuss about a simple, plain question?

If you don't care about my definition, well whatever, I was just curious of your definition and thus I asked you. But, well, obviously you don't have one or don't want to tell us your definition which to me means the same in the end: you don't have one...

Gerald

What new routers is he talking about? lol.

I knew it, OLD guys there's a whole new line of NAT routers on the market that you seem to know nothing about just have a look put away the i know every thing additude and have a look

/p32

: > you say no, its firewall like You and the other guy remind me of the old net hardware guys in our shop : >

: > have'nt learned a new approach in years and always suggesting the unnessary. : : And I'm not ignorant enough to believe that something called NAT makes the : device a firewall. Us old net guys are what keeps companies safe and : secure, because we don't FALL FOR THE HYPE and MISINFORMATION spread by : people like you. You can disagree all you want, but a NAT box is nothing : like a firewall, doesn't protect a network like a firewall, and does not : offer the same features as a firewall. : : What you need to go is learn something from us OLD guys so that when : you're old you may still be in this field instead of working at McDonalds. : : : -- : snipped-for-privacy@rrohio.com : remove 999 in order to email me :

I just checked a BEFSX41 and a BEFSR41 and a BEFVP41 router, the remote management interface is not accessible at all unless it's directly enabled on the remote management radio button.

Maybe you should consider that as professionals in this business that most of us keep very close watch on new products if not also purchasing them.

Your lack of judgment clouds your ability to grasp reality when it goes against what you think you may possibly know.

No I wrote " 'firewall' is turned on ". Has the meaning of double quotes in English changed that much in recent time? I quoted "firewall" to refer to the terminology of the router. It allows me to turn on of turn off the "firewall". If I thought it was a real firewall, I would have written firewall without quotes. Please note the difference of meaning with and without quotes. (Although now in these sentenses talking about firewalls, "firewalls", and "'firewalls'" makes it a little harder to do it right...)

If remote management is enabled the ports are open anyway. I don't have remote management turned on. On my Linksys WRT54, if I disable the "firewall" switch the management interface will be accessible regardless of my remote management settings. Internally the management web server must be bound on all interfaces of the Linksys and the "firewall" does the filtering...

Gerald

O.K. Just write that you don't have a definition.

Gerald

visit Netgears website I'll leave the rest to your good judgement be warned they use firewall and router in the same sentence its scary /p32

I have checked again: my Linksys WRT54G is accessible on port 80 and 443 if I turn off the "firewall protection". It has remote management disabled. I just tested it: I can reconfigure the router from remote when the "firewall" is off.

Gerald

What NAT router do you have in mind? Which NAT routers are the "whole new line"? I bought one recently. Nothing exciting there...

But you won't tell us anyway, I suspect, just like you won't give us your definition of "firewall". The only "I know every thing attitude" I can see is with you as you seem to be too arrogent to even bother telling details of your "vast knowledge" and just keep saying that we know nothing. Thus, as long as you don't demonstrate that you really know more then we do I start to consider your comments not really much more than a waste of bandwidth.

Gerald

Been there, also beta test firmware for them - so, when are you going to list something new that is different than the last batch?

PCU, you are going away because you don't want to see that you're wrong. You've not provided a definition of what "Firewall" means and you've also not shown us ONE new router that has advanced features that the ones on the market for the last year don't have.

I suggest that you are leaving because you're a troll that was nailed to the proverbial board and that you don't actually know anything about security or routers or even NAT.

Interesting, I didn't realize you were using the wireless version. I've installed a couple of them and had to remove them, the WRT54G specifically, due to signal quality issues. I don't have a WRT54G in the shop right now, is your firmware current or are you running one of the Open Source firmware updates for it?

Oh, look at google.com and you will see that you are wrong. You just don't know anything and just think you can talk yourself out. Whenever you get asked you just give a vague answer "there's a whole new line of NAT routers", "visit Netgears website". If you knew of anything you could just say Netgear's router XYZ or Linksys' router ABC. But you know of nothing. Why don't you look at cisco.com and have a look...

Gerald

When it comes to wireless I like the idea of setting up the wired network and then adding a separate component for Wireless or VPN. I like the little BEFVP41 units, they do 20 IPSec Tunnels. I use a D-Link AP for my wireless connections in the office. This method lets me change the wireless part without the expense of changing the router or network layout.

You aren't stationed in Japan as part of the Air Force or Navy are you? I was in the Navy in the 80's and my little brother was somewhere in Japan with the Air Force around the early 90's.

I am using the WRT54G-JP V2 running the current European English

2.02.07. I hope they come up with an 3.03 in English, soon. Right now, 3.03 is only available in US English and German. I would prefer a non-US version for the channels. I generally prefer English versions to German versions as the latter are sometimes badly translated which require you to translate the German text back to English word by word to grasp the meaning of it... ;-)

Well, but maybe I should just update to the US 3.03.06. I run only 11g anyway... I am still hoping that the sveasoft new release will go public, soon. I would really love to try that. I could use a VPN server...

Gerald