Slashdot Mirror
Unfinished Windows 7 Hotspot Feature Exploited
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Engadget: "It wasn't all that long ago that Microsoft was talking up the Virtual WiFi feature developed by Microsoft Research and set for inclusion in Windows 7, but something got lost along the road to release day, and the functionality never officially made it into the OS. As you might expect with anything as big and complicated as an operating system though, some of that code did make it into the final release, and there was apparently enough of it for the folks at Nomadio to exploit into a full fledged feature. That's now become Connectify, a free application from the company that effectively turns any Windows 7 computer into a virtual WiFi hotspot — letting you, for instance, wirelessly tether a number of devices to your laptop at location where only an Ethernet jack is available, or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi."
Just like I could do on a Mac with the included OS since 2001.
Amirite?
Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
"Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
Can someone please tell me why the Connectify website is "(C) 2009 - 2010."
If these are undocumented APIs, then you can bet that they'll be removed or otherwise disabled in the first service pack.
Not surprising really. The secret formula for CokeCola is probably hidden in there too.
I wonder how many 'libraries of congress' could fit in the space occupied by unused but deployed windows code.
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
I can do this with my HTC phone and don't even need to find an ethernet port to do it.
just like apple's OSX's built-in Internet Sharing feature did way back in OSX 10.4 (Tiger).. you can share your ethernet > wifi or you can share a wired connection to your ethernet (in case you have an older computer around which doesnt have wireless)
keep those photocopiers running MS...
Is that similar to the Internet Connection Sharing that Windows has had since (at least) Windows 95?
Wow, you haven't been able to do this using any Windows since... long ago? With only about 10 clicks too. Not to mention my cellphone could already do this for ages. This news is approximately 8 years old, congrats Slashdot!
or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi
That coffee shop has to pay for its connection, and bandwidth is a limited resource. Is Engadget going to instruct us on how to distract the employees while you pour free coffee into your thermos too?
Windows has had ICS (simple network bridging) since Windows 98 2e (May 1999). Would be hard for them to have cribbed an Apple feature] from April 2005 back then.
I read the article and it does not make clear if it will work with any card.
I ask this because I was looking to do this some time ago (I want to connect my DS and Wii to internet using my existing PC as an access point) and, although there was some software (now discontinued) that allowed you to do that on WIndows, and on Linux you had to spend your time with ifconfig and whatnot (it was never clear for me, but the first step was to change your wifi card to AP mode).
Thus I wonder if this Vista feature would make it possible use the computer as an AP with all types of wireless cards.
Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
That was a feature since windows 98SE, this talking about connecting to a hotspot with wifi and then letting other devices connect to the laptops wifi and access the internet that way. Instead of ethernet>wifi>internet or wifi>ethernet>internet this is wifi>wifi>internet where the host computer only has one wifi card.
No. OSX does not allow you to use a single wireless card for both 1) connecting to a wireless network, and 2) broadcasting itself as a hotspot.
Windows has had Internet Sharing since the 90's (oh dear, did Apple not invent that feature?!). The new feature here is virtualizing the wireless card so it behaves as though it's two wireless cards. Try that on any version of OSX and let me know how it goes.
Is that similar to the Internet Connection Sharing that Windows has had since (at least) Windows 95?
Yes and no, Windows ICS is only DHCP/NAT software. OSX Internet Sharing also allows you to configure your Wifi card into access point mode. Connectify is promising to allow you to run Windows wifi cards in access-point mode WHILE using it in regular structured mode... which seems like a dubious claim. The makers of Connectify haven't yet listed which cards they are going to support.
In short
Never mind, they list the cards they are trying to support
http://connectify.me/docs/
Now slow down a minute.
My very first laptop that I purchased back in 2003 could do this, and it was running Windows XP. I used this feature almost every day in the dorms to put up a wireless network with Internet so that we could have some small lan parties. The Internet was a little slow with a huge group of people using a single connection, but it worked really well. This feature worked naively in Windows XP and didn't require an additional software or special tinkering, you just had link the Ethernet to the wireless port. It also worked in reverse (You just had to swap a check box), but I never had the opportunity to try it.
What this feature does (in addition to that) is reshare a wifi connection with a single wifi card. That way 1 person could pay for the wireless Internet, and then immediately reshare it on the same computer.
Just because you didn't know a windows machine could do it, doesn't mean it can't. Apple is not the foundation of all ideas when it comes to computers. Sometimes Microsoft gets something right too.
This was already posted:
http://mobile.slashdot.org/story/09/10/28/1758226/The-Software-Router-As-MiFi-Killer
Plus, this is obviously a sales ploy to get people interested in the "Connectify" product.
I swear I've been doing this with linux for years, routing this and routing that...
It's just two interfaces, an echo "1" to the ip_forward, and a little masquerading and we're good to go.
Windows 7 is cool though. Wish they kept the "E" edition.
~@~
Didn't we have this app in an article last week?
It's not news. It's olds at best.
One of these days, I am going to flip out. When I flip out, I'll be back in five minutes.
This has been standard and expected functionality in Linux for years; practically as long as wi-fi cards have been supported. Why the hell is this news? Microsoft didn't even complete the support, it's a third party hack... This is worse than the claim that Aero Glass was revolutionary.
Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once
What is the difference between this and creating an ad-hoc network and enabling internet connection sharing for the physical port in Vista (and XP, and OS X, and Linux)?
They were vigilant about blocking mailinator domains, so if you just want the direct link to download: http://www.connectify.me/a103dk/ConnectifyInstaller.exe Or visit: http://www.connectify.me/thanks.html
When modding "Informative", please make sure it both has a source and IS actually informative.
This software is nicer than that, it is using the same wireless hardware to connect to the internet and to offer the access point.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Connectify is promising to allow you to run Windows wifi cards in access-point mode WHILE using it in regular structured mode... which seems like a dubious claim.
Nope, a lot of wireless cards out there do support this in theory. Of course, you have to run both on the same channel.
Seriously? It took their “research” division to come up with NAT, DHCP, and DNS caching or proxy? Seriously?
Why a "virtual" hotspot? What's virtual about it? If this turns a Windows PC into a Wi-Fi access point, then surely that's a hotspot plain and simple?
you know, when I hear of a windows feature being "exploited" the utilization of a useful feature is not what comes to mind.
Is that similar to the Internet Connection Sharing that Windows has had since (at least) Windows 95?
ICS Came out in Windows 98R2
Half baked Windows 7 feature is actually used by people!
Where is the exploit here?!
(Offtopic)
Re: your sig -
Did you run out of characters or glitch Alex S's name?
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Sounds like MS actually finished a feature that would make Windows 7 more valuable than XP (I haven't found another one). But of course they had to cut it out because some of their customers would lose revenue because they currently rely on over-charging for WiFi.
This is just yet another example of why we need this functionality in Linux TODAY, and why we all need to switch to Linux IMMEDIATELY.
These corporations are all sucking the life blood out of technology just to make a couple extra bucks, and stifling our advancement as a species for monetary gain. It's absolutely disgusting and embarrassing.
I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
or even tether a number of laptops together at a coffee shop that charges for WiFi
It sounds very similar to a case of conspiracy, aiding and abetting computer intrusion, and wire fraud.
Maybe Microsoft could be prosecuted for producing software which may be manipulated.
Or maybe Motorola could be prosecuted for making hardware which could be modified to circumvent ToS.
Or maybe Sony could be prosecuted for making PlayStations which can be hacked.
Why are the innovative individuals always the ones bearing the legal load?
the NPG electrode was replaced with carbon blac
They are also planning on selling the software when it leaves beta. Which may very well wind up being a very short life-span indeed, considering the only reason it wasn't enabled in Win7 was driver support. One could reasonably expect driver-support for the native code will be forthcoming by Win7 SP1.
The hacks allow you to operate a wireless network in infustructure mode similiar to a wireless access point.
Previously in windows you could do ad-hoc mode (conversation of peers) to share wired connections over ICS or by just bridging interfaces.
I personally don't care about the differences between ad-hoc and infustructure mode. They accomplish the same goal and sharing a connection is no more or less complicated either way.
So this feature was created by Microsoft Research back in 2005, and has been available for download ever since: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/downloads/994abd5f-53d1-4dba-a9d8-8ba1dcccead7/
I fail to see how this is news, they included it by default in Win 7 and someone accessed it, yay. This has been doable for 4 years...
The resulting Connectify differs from the Internet connection sharing that Windows already supports via an "ad hoc" network connection, which lets several Windows computers share a single connection. "For one thing, it shows up as a real wireless access point," Gizis said. "Two, Internet connection sharing has issues. It returns to the default settings every time you shut down a connection. And three, you can join another wireless network and still run the Connectify Hotspot on the same Wi-Fi card."
One application came immediately to mind, Gizis continued. "You're sitting in a coffee shop that charges you for a wireless connection. With Connectify, I can pay for that connection, and still have all my other devices, like my iPhone, connected to the Internet."
It's odd you should say this, because I've had a Windows guru/sysadmin try several times to get this working (with his Dell running XP), and every time he's given up after about 45 minutes of messing with configuration settings. I myself tried it on both of my work-issued PCs (an HP and a Lenovo, both running XP) and found it completely impossible. Of the many Windows users I know, none have ever successfully used their laptop as an AP or a reverse bridge (providing connectivity over ethernet from a single wireless connection).
Therefore, you are either lying, or a statistical anomaly. I trust you're recounting the story accurately, so I'm going to conclude that your success is the exception rather than the rule.
A cat is no trade for integrity!
... that an OS was just released with incomplete, unimplemented, undocumented, untested code? Has that ever happened in the history of computing before? This sounds incredible! Maybe MS can get a patent on it!
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
"These older devices are known to be compatible:
Intel 5100/5300 (with latest drivers from Intel's site, version 13.0.0.107)
Ralink RT2870 (in many 802.11n USB dongles)
Broadcom 4310-series (in many Dell laptops)
Realtek RTL8187SE (with the drivers that came with Windows 7)
D-link AirPlus G DWL-G510 Wireless PCI Adapter (driver version 3.0.1.0)
Dell 5520 (builtin many Dell laptops)
Atheros AR5007EG with 8.0.0.238 firmware
These older devices are known to be incompatible:
Intel 3945/4965,2200BG (most Intel cards, unfortunately)
Realtek RTL8187 (like in older 802.11bg USB dongles)
Zydas ZD1211 (also in 802.11bg USB dongles)
Broadcom 4320-series (in many Dell laptops)
Atheros AR9285 (likely others too)
D-Link AirPlus G DWL-G122
Mac Book Builtin Broadcom devices"
Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
Well no wonder it got removed! What a stupid feature! I mean it kinda sounds neat but my spare wireless router is about 5x smaller and 20x lighter than even my smallest laptop. I'd rather stick that in my pocket than lug around an entire computer.
Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
any unix machine can do this, like a billion years ago.
Worked on Mac OS X 10.3
"Ninety percent of everything is crud." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_law
But, in light of the above adage, when they are selling a $5 cup of of coffee, it sure seems to be the way to bet.
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
I must have... I'll go back and remove a space so that it fits.
Learn about Photography Basics.
Expect the next release of the EULA to say something like any future and unknown at the moment uses of the operating system or its APIs that MS doesn't approve of at some future date, become automatic EULA violations even if those uses are unknown at the time the end user first agreed to the EULA.
In the past, I have also successfully used a PC running XP Professional to put a wireless adapter in soft-ap mode and bridge it with a wired ethernet connection. I used this to allow my Nintendo DS to connect to the Internet because at the time I did not have a wireless access point and it worked fairly well.
If I remember correctly I had to use a specific set of drivers for the wifi card that supported soft-ap mode and then it was a simple matter of selecting both network connections and telling Windows to bridge them.
Does this mean Intel has been "exploiting" Windows Virtual WiFi with the "My WiFi" feature on their 5000 series WiFi adapters all this time?
Old news, it's absolutely not an exploit or some hack and has already been in use by Intel for months if not the past year.
Intel has a very similar tech called MyWifi in their newer cards, it uses Windows ICS so it differs in implementation, but does offer a full AP mode while being connected to an external wifi network.
http://ces.cnet.com/8301-19167_1-10139172-100.html
Or any Linux computer that supports networking and wireless. This feature can also be easily set up with a GUI like FireStarter.
To FOREDECKER (an MS mgr.):
----
1.) TELL US WHY ROOTKIT.COM SAID THIS BELOW (who published code that shows how to EASILY "unhook" the new NDIS6 firewall in VISTA, Windows Server 2008, & Windows 7 no less) & why they said this:
http://www.rootkit.com/newsread.php?newsid=952
PERTINENT EXCERPT/QUOTE:
"BTW, the firewalls based on NDIS v6, which was introduced in Windows Vista, are much easier to unhook and bypass."
(AND, more importantly, since you claim to be a senior development mgr. @ Microsoft, what you plan to do about it (or, if you plan to @ least investigate their claims @ least))
They provide code for "unhooking" (making useless) the firewall(s) designed based from NDIS6... please, look into it, or @ least give us an idea of your intent in regards to this. Thanks.
&
2.) Give us a SOLID answer to why 0 was removed in HOSTS then, because in HOSTS files:
a. 127.0.0.1 or even 0.0.0.0 HOSTS files only, vs. 0 blocking "IP" based ones, only makes for larger slower HOSTS file loads into memory (be that the local DNS client, or diskcache even) & using hosts thus, speeds you up online as well as a bonus for speed, not only safety (by blocking adbanners which have been shown to harbor malware, or isn't this indicative of that -> Anti-malvertising.com? ) and, optionally also speeding ones' self up online as well, by allowing one to hardcode in one's favorites to avoid potentially compromised DNS servers (ala Dan Kaminsky proof thereof!)
AND
b. HOSTS also make you SAFER online, no CPU or RAM + other forms of I/O burning use needed
(As seen in more complicated filter like iptables in Linux for example: Yes, no cpu burned there either, but that's just more complex than editing a text file like HOSTS is)
Nor does it involve communicating with a potentially compromiseable DNS server that uses RAM, CPU, & other I/O.
YOU can easily "Block out" known bad servers using HOSTS files, for security!
(From RELIABLE lists, that are easily found from Dancho Danchev of ZDNet, stopbadware.org, or even Spybot Search & Destroy + WIKIPEDIA even)
Doing that, YOU CANNOT BE BURNED by many a malware!
A hosts file is on EVERY SYSTEM THAT USES A TCP/IP stack based on BSD ref. designs (not some fantasy land db that doesn't exist, but, instead in a HOSTS file you have already that is easily edited or downloaded from places like mvps.org or here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hosts_file [wikipedia.org] )
----
I noted this to you MS folks here on THIS site, and same here, on MS' own blogs on "Engineering Windows 7":
Welcome to our blog dedicated to the engineering of Microsoft Windows 7:
http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/25/feedback-and-engineering-windows-7.aspx
(Albeit there @ that blog, with a HELL of a LOT more technical detail on the comparison of the 3 part design of the older IP stack defense system (tcpip.sys surrounded by ipfltdrv.sys (gone now in WinVISTA/WinSrv2k8/Windows7), ipsec.sys, & ipnat.sys) & it is NOT AS EASY TO "UNHOOK" as is the "single/dual part only" based "WFP" (windows filtering platform) based firewalls now in VISTA/WindowsServer 2008 & Windows 7, per rootkit.com quoted above no less))
----
At MS' "Engineering Windows Blog" in the URL above? Well - I said pretty much the SAME stuff, & in that latter one? Well... I was "blown off" as was everyone else in the end!
(Hey - We're (guys like myself or others pointing out things we have noted) ONLY TRYING TO HELP MS)
NOW - I actually hope I am wrong, but...
Loads of a smaller HOSTS file, LINE BY LINE smaller, are entirely PROVABLE easily as being faster (in the File Open/Read/Flush-Close i-O cycle usin
Even when MS do something right for once, the FOSS shills here will still find a way to use emotive language and completely change the meaning of the title and summary.
Welcome to /.
No kidding. It took me 3 re-reads to understand that this was a positive article.
Bart: Don't be a sap, Dad. These are just crappy knock-offs.
Homer: Pfft. I know a genuine Panaphonics when I see it. And look, there's Magnetbox and Sorny.
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
This is nothing new. Once, in a pinch, I turned my old PIII laptop running linux into a wireless AP. Worked really well, just not very economical.
It's pretty easy to do.
I know it's technically possible. Actually, some cards could support separate channels. It's unlikely that this will ever work reliably though.
Apple has only used 4 wifi chipsets and officially supports the feature, so they can actually support features like this reliably. If you look at the list of "supported" cards for Connectify, you see you have to have certain revisions of firmware for the card to be supported... it's likely this is going to break between driver releases.
you know, when I hear of a windows feature being "exploited" the utilization of a useful feature is not what comes to mind.
Well, what other options are there?
If it was a security vulnerability in Windows,
1) It wouldnt be news at all
2) You would be informed about it by the 20+ windows updates that would install themselves in the "background"
http://blogs.chron.com/techblog/archives/2006/09/free_public_wif.html. points out that any time you connect to a WiFi SSID, your laptop will then appear to be hosting an adhoc SSID of the same name.... weird but true, at least on XP, and explains why I see so many "Free Public WiFi" adhoc mode SSIDs almost anywhere, including on trains where I know there is no official WiFi hotspot. Most of these are probably not hackers trying to do a MITM attack, since this is something XP does automatically.
Does Windows 7 do the same thing?
Now available in GUI
"This APK guy goes away if you ignore him for a while. He needs meds." - by symbolset (646467) on Tuesday November 03, @11:03PM (#29973298)
Symbolset, this isn't the 1st time you've used an "adhominem" style attack of myself on me, rather than attacking my points (so, I thought I'd let that be known, first of all). Secondly, I tend to agree with what was said here by others:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1429510&cid=29977664
And, you'd need an attorney (if not meds for being the crazy one here), if you keep libelling others that way, online or otherwise, symbolset (if not an iron jaw, because sooner or later? You'll run into a "real bad motor scooter" that's going to "punch out your lites" for your libellous mouth).
Above all else - Do you possess a license to practice psychiatry & to dispense such diagnoses? No?? Didn't think so. Did you perform a formal psychiatric examination on myself to come up with your "sidewalk surgeon/quack" immediate "prognosis/diagnosis"??? No again????
So much for YOU, and, if THAT is "the best you have"????? I suggest you get over your "wannabe PHD in psychiatry status"...
====
And, another "added note" on HOSTS files, from SECURITYFOCUS.COM (just to put the "icing on the cake" from my original post, & this IS IN FAVOR OF HOSTS FILES, again):
RESURRECTING THE KILLFILE:
(by Mr. Oliver Day)
http://www.securityfocus.com/columnists/491
PERTINENT EXCERPTS/QUOTES:
"The host file on my day-to-day laptop is now over 16,000 lines long. Accessing the Internet particularly browsing the Web is actually faster now."
"From what I have seen in my research, major efforts to share lists of unwanted hosts began gaining serious momentum earlier this decade. The most popular appear to have started as a means to block advertising and as a way to avoid being tracked by sites that use cookies to gather data on the user across Web properties. More recently, projects like Spybot Search and Destroy offer lists of known malicious servers to add a layer of defense against trojans and other forms of malware."
----
A noted security expert/journallist is even "seeing the light" as to HOSTS files benefits for both SPEED, AND SECURITY, as I stated to foredecker (our alleged MS dev mgr. here on /.)
AND, of course, there IS the issue of the single/dual layer "WFP" firewall design in Windows being EASIER TO "UNHOOK", by rootkit.com's analysts as well (once more):
http://www.rootkit.com/newsread.php?newsid=952
PERTINENT EXCERPT/QUOTE:
"BTW, the firewalls based on NDIS v6, which was introduced in Windows Vista, are much easier to unhook and bypass."
====
The main thing is, WHY DOESN'T FOREDECKER RESPOND? Have I, "little ole' me", caught MS with their "pants down"? Wouldn't be a first: Ask Dr. Mark Russinovich about that, & his "rookie hardcodes" in his pagedefrag.exe tool I pointed out he hardcoded C:\ into, & that I told he EXACTLY why/where/how to fix it + he thanked me for it.
(Nuff said... &, "too, Too EASY")
APK
P.S.=> Of course, above ALL else, is the fact that this alleged development manager from Microsoft, in Foredecker, is refusing to respond here, vs. my original initial points as well on both HOSTS files in VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7 and the WFP firewall design (vs. the older & NOT EASILY UNHOOKED firewall designs in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 in my original post to here, here -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1429510&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=29967174 )... apk
"It's time for a Security Enhanced Windows. The federal government has a batch of policies and registry settings people can adopt as templates for locking down workstations and servers. Now might be a good time to roll out a similar offering." - by symbolset (646467) on Tuesday November 03, @11:03PM (#29973298)
It's already been done 2x for the United States Armed forces symbolset (just shows how much YOU KNOW (not)), ask ForeDecker about that, or refer to these URL's:
US military gets its own secure version of Windows:
http://news.techworld.com/operating-systems/2666/us-military-gets-its-own-secure-version-of-windows/
AND, they also got such a secured Windows issued their way, BEFORE THAT TOO, in 2003, to the US Armed forces, before... think, or LOOK, before you speak, symbolset. Learn a few things first, then, open your mouth... "m'kay"?
(Ask foredecker, our resident MS dev. mgr. here)
AND, for those lacking that (only the US Armed forces gets that)?
Well, there is the list by the gov't. that works well as symbolset notes, but iirc, One I wrote one is from FAR before it, circa 1997-2001 that was featured @ NTCompatible.com as their "Article #1" & was noted as "GOOD STUFF" @ NEOWIN forums, here as proof thereof (from 2001, when they finally discovered it) ->
http://www.neowin.net/news/main/01/11/29/apk-a-to-z-internet-speedup--security-text
I only FURTHER IMPROVED THAT GUIDE, which across the 20 forums it is currently on, has been rated "5/5 stars", or made an "Essential Guide", or "Sticky/Pinned Thread" and even got me PAID for winning PCPitStop's January 2008 "Article of the Month" no less for producing it.
Searching "HOW TO SECURE Windows 2000/XP" online @ GOOGLE can show ANYONE proof of THAT much, as it "owns" nearly the "TOP 30 SPOTS" consecutively there.
An example thereof? OK:
http://www.tcmagazine.com/forums/index.php?s=954cd919a263e7fa80bd77a69a08b157&showtopic=2662
Where it is over 53,500++ views currently, in less than 1.5 yrs.' time online... & over 250,000++ views strong, with folks saying "Good stuff" or finding them NOT SHOWING ANY VULNERABILITIES or PENETRATIONS by malware in general even, IF they followed my security guide for Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 (even VISTA onwards, to an extent) to the letter!
----
People such as THRONKA @ XtremePCCentral.com here stated, verbatim by he:
http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=29ca0dfc286bf1e7ff52028336149ce0&t=28430&page=3
"Its 2009 - still trouble free! I was told last week by a co worker who does active directory administration, and he said I was doing overkill. I told him yes, but I just eliminated the half life in windows that you usually get. He said good point. So from 2008 till 2009. No speed decreases, its been to a lan party, moved around in a move, and it still NEVER has had the OS reinstalled besides the fact I imaged the drive over in 2008. Great stuff!"
----
Symbolset? You TALK OUT YOUR BEHIND, without knowing any facts...
(It tends to NOW make sense why you only make speculations that have already been done, and that you perform "adhominem attacks" on those that post valid points, and you avoid disputing or disproving those points, beacause you clearly do not know much about this art & science/field, period)
APK
P.S.=> Better luck next time, Symbolset (you pitiful ignorant adhominem attack utilizing TROLL) - lol! "too, Too, TOO EASY!"... and, the day YOU can show us you've done ALL
He needs meds.
Do you possess a license to practice psychiatry & to dispense such diagnoses? No?? Didn't think so. Did you perform a formal psychiatric examination on myself to come up with your "sidewalk surgeon/quack" immediate "prognosis/diagnosis"???
Yeah well, you just make it easy... Somewhere in your hateful screeds you dropped a couple of clues.
Or maybe the next day posting 'Pwned by an AC' and linking to your earlier rants.
Nobody said WHAT you have, but it's obvious you have some mental deficiency.
Sue me bitch.
You sure talk big behind your nickname punk. Say that to the guy's face and I bet you end up on the ground with your face splattered you little fuckwit shit head.
Per my subject-line above? Well, ok - here we go:
"Yeah well, you just make it easy..." - by WNight (23683) on Friday November 06, @07:50PM (#30011598) Homepage
To make you & your sock puppets look stupid for coming in here, making insults & libel directed my way, and then you screwing up on whether there are security hardened versions of Windows already? Absolutely.
(I think the "shoe is on the other foot" here, pal... lol!)
----
"Somewhere in your hateful screeds you dropped a couple of clues." - by WNight (23683) on Friday November 06, @07:50PM (#30011598) Homepage
What hateful screed is this? I only pointed out some facts, & ones that may actually HELP Microsoft become aware of a problem is all.
For that?
Well, from symbolset (in his reply)??
I was then libelled + trolled by symbolset.
Now - Is it my fault he messed up on many facts regarding Windows itself & security on it, as well as his pitiful attempt @ adhominem attacks of myself (vs. attacking any technical points I made, on HOSTS and on what ROOTKIT.COM stated about the Windows 7, Windows VISTA, & Windows Server 2008 firewall being FAR easier to unhook in its "WFP" single layer/dual driver version those OS version use now, vs. the 3 part/3 driver model used in Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003)?
Anything I noted, facts-wise? Hey - Anyone is absolutely FREE to verify then via looking @ the URL from ROOTKIT.COM in regards to their statements that unhooking the new NDIS6 firewall is easier to do, because they publish the code to do it no less... as well as verifying my statements on HOSTS files, with an easy test a rookie beginning programmer could perform easily.
(All, regarding Microsoft removing 0 as a blocking IP address in HOSTS when it makes for a faster loading HOSTS file (vs. using 0.0.0.0 & especially 127.0.0.1 as a blocking address vs. known bad domains etc.) by 30-50% less size because of using 0 (even 0.0.0.0 is better than 127.0.0.1 on a couple of grounds in terms of size + efficiency, but 0 beats them both & on both accounts)).
AND?
Pinging a 0 blocked site returns 0.0.0.0 so it is completely legit on Windows 2000/XP/Server 2003 and it works, and did on VISTA until the 12/09/2008 MS Patch Tuesday, when MS pulled the ability to use 0 as a blocking IP address in a HOSTS file.
Strange they would take away something that aids speed & lessens bloat is all, considering many 1,000's of Windows users (and more on other OS') use HOSTS files to speed themselves up online (per Mr. Oliver Day of Security Focus' statements mind you as well as my own) as users of Spybot "Search & Destroy" can & do, plus another example would be the users of mvps.org also (tons more too, but those will do, for now).
Most of all, on 0 blocking in HOSTS? Especially considering the fact that Windows 2000, in its original pre service pack OEM form directly from MS only allowed 0.0.0.0 @ BEST, & then after service packs for Windows 2000, it could use the smaller & faster 0 based blocking address vs. known bad sites (or more like adbanners, which also have been shown to harbor malware/malscripting mind you many times over the past few years now as well)...
AGAIN - So, why did MS remove the ability to use a smaller & faster 0 based blocking address in HOSTS then? That's all I have been asking, only to be trolled by the likes of a screwup like symbolset, who didn't even know there actually ARE security hardened builds of Windows (US Armed forces have them, & ever since 2003-2004 + they got a newer one last year no less as well).
They added it & for the very reasons I noted: Smaller & FASTER HOSTS files result.
I repeat my question: So, why on earth did MS remove 0 as a valid blocking IP address in HOSTS files in VISTA/Windows Server 2008/Windows7 then (especially when it produces a smaller + faster loading HOSTS file)?
Attacking me libellously make
If I have multiple clients connected to my access point and using my internet, can I sniff their traffic somehow?
Attacking you libelously gives some lawyer its wings, or something like that.
Was that post long enough? You could have ranted on about some Microsoft thing longer... I didn't see anything connecting me with the Illuminati, or the guys broadcasting mind control rays into your fillings. You're obviously not seeing the big picture.
But yes, you cleverly placed me as symbolset's sock-puppet. He cleverly opened this Slashdot account years previous to his main account, and made thousands of unrelated postings, just to build a false front of trust. But then, basking in the glory of his own genius he posts an insult to you from the wrong account and you finally put together all the pieces. Well done, you're one step closer to the ultimate truth!
Get some meds.