theyarecomingforyou Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 me101... I haven't seen you around for ages. I remember when you used to post a lot on the mainpage (was it years back?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearded Kirklander Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 You win!Apparently we got riled up over nothing heh... I'd be riled up too if they don't let you turn it off. XP, for all its good points, has some annoying tendencies to over-rule me. I can't find a way to turn file protection off with SP1, for example. Blech. Having to use hacks to disable and uninstall MSN and other stuff is kinda lame. But what can ya do? MS rules the world of computing. :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redestium Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Most? No, not most. Just your average idiot who runs out, buys a Dell, and runs a PC with no firewall, AV, or anti-spyware. People like that are the reason Sasser spreads, and they should be off PCs anyway. Darwin theory at work. I've been using Windows since 3.1 (I've recently switched to Linux permanently, after Windows ****ed me off for the last time) and guess how many viruses I got? Zero. Zip. None. Zilch. You know why? I always updated, always had an AV running, ran TWO software firewalls, and had a router firewall. Those are the kind of people that should be on a PC. Simple as this:If you don't know how to USE a PC, then stay the hell away from them. You know how to use a PC? But you used 2 software firewalls...hmm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FM Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 MS rules the world of computing. :huh: Dosen't have to be that way! :laugh: (oh nos, I think I'm becoming nuka_t) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 if you need AV at all then you arent that great with computers Hmmm, utter toss! If you use AV you are protecting against the possibility of a virus, NOT admitting defeat with computers. Better to have and not need than need and not have. I use AV software, or at least keep it running. That does not imply that I am crud at using a PC, it implies I am using AV just in case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FM Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Better to have and not need than need and not have. You know, I think that's the 1st time you and I ever, and I mean EVER agreed on something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Don't expect to install post SP2 updates because you will need SP2 before you can get them. thats fine i can start using linux :) btw, i don't call limiting tcp connections a security update just a slowing down of worm spreading which doesnt make anything more secure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DigitalN. Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 I use AV software, or at least keep it running. That does not imply that I am crud at using a PC, it implies I am using AV just in case. exactly, the other two PCs on my network are the bug and virus ridden mess, but I am not allowed to touch them becaause when I was 7 I acciendly went and formatted my dads backup drive. I WAS ****ING 7. oh well, they have viruses, I dont :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Montage Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 o83zero: Oh I dunno, I'm pretty bored of a certain theme now too! I just think that AV is not only about YOUR pc, it's about protecting others. They scan outgoing files/mails too. Remember, it's more like insurance than anything. I am currently buying a new house. It is well built. The roof tiles are NOT going to fall off. I still take out insurance, just in case one does, and hits a car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrett Socling Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 thank you for making that choice for me microsoft. ditto :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redestium Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Hmmm, utter toss! If you use AV you are protecting against the possibility of a virus, NOT admitting defeat with computers. Better to have and not need than need and not have.I use AV software, or at least keep it running. That does not imply that I am crud at using a PC, it implies I am using AV just in case. True, it's protection just like using your seatbelt while driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Lamar Posted July 20, 2004 Share Posted July 20, 2004 Max Connections can be changed in SP1 right, but comp security is more important, than a download. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[moribundi] Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 (edited) More great news for Windows users...MS needs to let people run their own damn PCs. Good logic, they'be been doing such a stellar job of "running their own PC's" so far, right? With the spread of worms that have had patches for months before they become widespread. People for the most part are pretty ignorant about computers. If they have to be forced to deal with certain things because they are lazy or stupid in order to make it better for the whole, I see no problem with that. It's about time, and I'm sick of all this security bull**** problems from people that can't be bothered to do a simple update. There will probably be an option to disable this, for the computer-saavy users, but for the widespread AOL/MSN using idiots out there, I think it's best to force them to comply until they become a bit more security-minded. *edit* So, apparently this will have no effect on anything other than unreachable hosts, which has nothing to do with P2P whatsoever. Amazing how people flip out and start flaming before all the facts are out and continue to flame because they don't understand what they've been told. Too sad. Edited July 21, 2004 by [moribundi] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hankyone Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 Max Connections can be changed in SP1 right, but comp security is more important, than a download. have you heard about "firewall" & "anti-virus" all the ppls who got blaster or sasser didn't even have a anti-virus running so i don't see how this will solve the problem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrett Socling Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 Does this look right? Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters] "TcpNumConnections"=dword:41fffffe maxconnect.reg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Lamar Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 have you heard about "firewall" & "anti-virus"all the ppls who got blaster or sasser didn't even have a anti-virus running so i don't see how this will solve the problem its not my problem that a person refuses to use an AV or firewall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hankyone Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 Does this look right?Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00 [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\Tcpip\Parameters] "TcpNumConnections"=dword:41fffffe should it be?: Value Data: 0 - 0xfffffe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hankyone Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 its not my problem that a person refuses to use an AV or firewall. thats theyre problem and this limmit doesn't solve it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimy Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 so is this slowing down eMule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dan C Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 I'm glad to be honest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aldo Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 have you heard about "firewall" & "anti-virus"all the ppls who got blaster or sasser didn't even have a anti-virus running so i don't see how this will solve the problem Antivirus did nothing to stop blaster - if you remembered how it worked, it crashed some service and caused the machine to reboot. Unless this AV was a firewall, it would not of stopped that. It may of stopped it sending out itself, but by the time most AV had been updated, it had done the most damage. This is a totally stupid change. One of the things newbies do is use kazaa like crazy, and shutting this off is a bad, bad thing, mainly for MS due to the amount of support calls they and the OEM manufacturers are gonna get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OptiPlex Posted July 21, 2004 Author Share Posted July 21, 2004 god stop the flames, there is already a workaround! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xendrome Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 theres no reason they should worry about it, the only time you have a large number of connections is on P2P , which isnt legal , therefore they arent going to trouble themselfs to let you download porn... i dont blame them, P2P is not legal? Thats news to me.. maybe what you are downloading is not legal.. but as far as I know P2P is probably the next great filesharing technology.. And the internet/webpages could eventually goto a peer to peer type of deal to speed up browsing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garrett Socling Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 should it be?: Value Data: 0 - 0xfffffe when I entered the value as supplied on the microsoft page, registry editor rendered it as it appears in my post. I don't know what to make of it cause I'm a n00b. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pogz Posted July 21, 2004 Share Posted July 21, 2004 Info quoted from ntcanuck.com forum: ?The limit you are hitting only applies to connections in which the destinations are unreachableb>. You absolutely should not hit it if you are opening TCP connections to addresses that are live with an active listener on the destination port. wow, everyone's making a big deal over nothing, as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts