Recommended Posts

Yep that is all I have running.

I wonder what is causing it?  :cry:

Is it only ever caused by a virus or spyware? I only ever get 2-3 of these messages a day.

BTW, I am on a router if that matters?

585653620[/snapback]

It can also be caused by certain programs EX: Port Scanners, People Claim Bittorrent clients, etc.

  • 3 weeks later...
new tcpip? wtf? whats this?? me confused.
Microsoft's Latest Security Update April 12, 2005 changed the TCPIP stack again undoing the speedup tweak. You have to reapply it.
tcpip version was 2180 and now is 2631. I can?t patch again. Doesn?t work.
Which patch was not working though?
  • 4 weeks later...

This setting is reversible and you do not need to reformat to restore it. It works before the update and after. If you do it before the update and then apply the update you will have to run it again because the update sets it back to 10. Here are Instructions on how to set it back to "unlimited". It is very safe to do.

Whatever you guys say it definitely speeds up Bit Torrent client downloads. I agree it shouldn't but it does.

There is a security risk if you don't have if you have decent firewall (Zone Alarm, Norton etc.) and Anti-virus software. If you don't DON'T PATCH IT! If you do MAKE SURE YOU KEEP THEM UP TO DATE - AUTOMATICALLY IF POSSIBLE.

ALSO IMPORTANT: Make sure automatic updates is enabled! Even if this breaks the patch! If an update does break the patch check back with LvlLord for an updated patch. Be patient and keep the Microsoft version until there is an update patch.

I've read this forum and can see both sides - end result is it's up to you. I'm a network programmer (C/C++) with 15+ yrs experience. Yes I can see why Microsoft put this in but I haven't disassembled it myself to see what it's really doing. However unpatched it definitely slows Bit Torrent client downloads by at least 30-50% for 3+ concurrent downloads. I know it shouldn't theoretically but the fact is it does.

Decent firewalls and anti-virus protect you against worms spreading anyway - PROVIDED THEY ARE KEPT UP-TO-DATE!

I hope this post finds the middle ground in the argument I have seen raging in this thread.

The Security Myth.

I'll try explaining this again. This limit ONLY "theoretically" affects how fast you spread a virus to other people. It does nothing to protect you, since you already have to be infected for the limit to take affect. Now if a virus has infected you, how much effort is it for the virus writter to change this limit itself? Thus why I think it is useless.

Changing this limit does nothing to protect you from anything. Now by all means if you want to promote some sort of Internet good will, then leave the limit in place. You are betting on not only getting infected but by an older virus as well.

A much better use of your time would be to keep you system up to date with all known security patches, an updated AntiVirus Program and either the XP or third party firewall turned on. This limit was added IMO for completely clueless users who never patch or use AV.

So please do not think that by not changing this limit you are somehow protecting your PC more.

Edited by Mastertech
Now if a virus has infected you, how much effort is it for the virus writter to change this limit itself?

585956594[/snapback]

It would be a lot of work. First, the file would have to be edited. Meaning the virus would have to plan for every version of the file, since they have different hex locations. Second, WFP would have to be disabled. Third, the machine would have to be rebooted for the file to be reloaded by the system. That's a lot of work for a virus to get around the limit, and a reboot would be quite noticable by the end user...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Forgive my ignorance, but the only difference I see here is that a USB-A is now a USB-C, so there are two of them. For the modern age (and I'd argue since 2020), most products would now come with USB-C as an option, if not the default. Display, charging, devices, etc on TWO connectors, sometimes all combined! So having 2 of those powerful ports is great for something this size! Meanwhile my Surface Pro (5) has a single USB-A port which I cannot even get display out to, instead relying on some Surface Connect dock which I don't have. That is a poor experience, not to mention expensive and not compatible with other devices. Thank God USB-C is mainstream!
    • wow. that color finally comes to Surface Pro. was always a little jelly when a friend had the sandstone Surface Laptop. I wonder how different this dune is from the sandstone. I'll be getting the dune version. always thought black and platinum were a little boring. I'll still have access to my blue Surface Pro 11 as it'll be a hand-me-down.
    • Looks a very subjective aren't they!? I like its simple design. I love the way Apple designs their products with function over form, minimalization, and simplicity over cluttered complex designs. Many, not all, of their products follow this trend, and the device becomes a tool rather than dominating the space. I do not however like their OS. I have never bought a Apple product, and while I'd consider the Neo for my wife, I am hoping there are better alternatives out there when her failing MacBook Pro 2017 finally stops. Fischer-Price is famously plastic, garish, and poorly made. Basically you're describing the Window Laptops the Neo competes against! This is how product design should be, and what Apple have often followed in recent years: https://tenprinciples.design/
    • Isn't that true for every codec? I remember having to buy a PCI MPEG-2 decoder card just so I could play DVDs on my computer back in the late 90s. AV1 support is still fairly new.
    • I'm no Apple fan, and have never bought an Apple product for myself. But I'd argue that where you think Apple is behind regarding an OLED display, that the vast majority of people out there wouldn't even know or care for an OLED. Apple have struck the balance well to create a price point that works, and I hope that PC manufactures, and Microsoft take notice. I'd argue that Asus will struggle to compete with the Neo BECAUSE they put in a more expensive OLED that many people won't actually notice with its deeper blacks. Most people wouldn't care either that their screen is stuck at 60Hz! When I bought a 4k monitor (future proof and for the space), my laptop could only push that out at 30Hz, and it worked fine for my needs for 1.5 years! Heck, the average human eye can't see more than 90Hz in many situations!! So while they are trying to differentiate themselves, and it may well gain them a few customers, for the most part, I think they're missing the point of what the Neo is for.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      B2Proxy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      MadMung0 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      jefred earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Apprentice
      JoeyNeo went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Week One Done
      oliviaexpo earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      485
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      228
    3. 3
      Skyfrog
      70
    4. 4
      FloatingFatMan
      58
    5. 5
      neufuse
      56
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!