newtear attack on pc advisor

  carolineann 19:15 10 Mar 2004

every time I go onto this web site my MC afee firewall informs me I have a newtear attack. Is this anything to be worried about? I am sure one of you guys must know what it is.

  powerless 19:17 10 Mar 2004

Scan your computer for viruses.

  VoG II 19:19 10 Mar 2004
  carolineann 19:20 10 Mar 2004

Scanning now. .

  carolineann 21:48 10 Mar 2004

Thanks for the info VoG.
also Powerless no virus ,guess the firewall is doing its job. Thanks guys.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 00:08 11 Mar 2004

As Newtear only affects 95 and NT it is unlikely that it is an attack. As Newtear was a DNS attack it is hardly likely to affect a home computer.

Like most firewalls, MacAfee reports ordinary internet traffic as 'attacks' and Steve 'barrow boy' Gibson's ultra lame ZoneAlarm, is top of the alert/paranoia tree. Firewalls can report 'newtear' attacks especially if you are behind a company firewall.

If you are on a home computer you have no chance of being hacked and even less of getting a DNS attack - if you did have a DNS attack a firewall would be of no use whatsoever (ask Steve Gibson about DNS attacks;-) ) and therefore there is NO point in having the alert button depressed. Turn off the alerts, as they will all be false, and surf on merrily.


  woodchip 00:19 11 Mar 2004

Turn the alerts of, they just scare you

  metamorph 00:28 11 Mar 2004

Are you saying zone alarms not worth having?
should i go back to mcafee?

  GANDALF <|:-)> 07:28 11 Mar 2004

Although I do not use a firewall, and a quick search of the forums will show the reasons why (main ones being that you will never get hacked on a home computer and the firewalls only hide ports) NO firewall will prevent a DNS attack and for that matter NO home computer will suffer one, something the Gibsonmeister seems to forget. /eyes raise/

I usually advise using a firewall for peace of mind if nothing else. My eyebrows do raise at Gibson's less than honest approach to explaining firewlls, his use of totally lame scripts to show your systems 'vulnerabilities' and for these reasons alone I never recommend him. However as ZA is about as 'good' as any other firewall there is no reason not to us it although I know that Outpost from click here is less resource hungry and does not give all the 'alerts' that the free version of ZA gives (they largely disappear when you buy the pro version - anyone seeing a pattern here?).

ONE antivirus and ONE firewall is ALL that is ever needed. Adaware can be thrown in for good measure.



  stlucia 08:47 11 Mar 2004

As one who is, hopefully, about to be connected to BB, I'm intrigued by your statement "If you are on a home computer you have no chance of being hacked ...", and your consequential recommendation that one doesn't need a firewall.

I'm a novice in these matters, can you explain in simple terms, please? What about all these guys who hijack computers to send out spam? Are you saying that all nasties, such as programs that do the hijacking, will be caught by my anti-virus software?

  GANDALF <|:-)> 09:04 11 Mar 2004

'your consequential recommendation that one doesn't need a firewall'...I do NOT recommend not using a firewall only that I have not use a firewall for 2 years and there are, IMHO, excellent reasons for not doing so. Firewalls will not stop Trojans and the use of computers to send out spam is more due to viruses. There are several programmes that will bypass ANY firewall (TooLeakey). Anonymous servers can be used to send spam but it is usually sent from legit sources. there is NOTHING on a home computer except drivel. It may seem important to the owner but it is of no use to anyone else. Hacking is about passwords NOT using unstable and unfixed home computers.


This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Best Black Friday Deals 2017

How modern book design was influenced by illustrated manuscripts

Best Black Friday Apple Deals 2017

Les meilleurs logiciels de montage vidéo gratuits (en 2017)