https://bit.ly/2LqN7gD
Full URL:
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/microsoft/rip-microsoft-to-drop-sup port-f or-windows-10-on-32-bit-systems/
For BBS sysops running (or wanting to run) on a 32-bit Windows 10 for DOS door support, it sounds like we might have to stick with an older build of Windows 10 for the 32-bit support.
Nightfox
On Wed 13-May-2020 21:37 , Nightfox@1:275/201.0 wrote:
phil, you're replying to stuff from may 2020
it's all good i wouldn't have seen it otherwise :) end of an era..
i think Microsoft's next step is removing Win32 support in favor of their API that goes along with the app store.. with support added back later as an emulation layer a bit like how the DOS support was before.
I don't see value in having a current version of windows even support 32 bit software let alone release an entirely 32bit version. I understand the use in this case with dos door games and such. But why run a current OS when you don't need to. In most cases running an older OS and only exposing what is required for your BBS to the internet. Anyone that takes any windows box and doesn't put it behind a decent firewall is asking for trouble.. new windows or old.
I don't see value in having a current version of windows even support 32 bit software let alone release an entirely 32bit version. I understand the use in this case with dos door games and such. But why run a current OS when you don't need to. In most cases running an older OS and only exposing what is required for your BBS to the internet. Anyone that takes any windows box and doesn't put it behind a decent firewall is asking for trouble.. new windows or old.
I don't see value in having a current version of windows even support 32 bit software let alone release an entirely 32bit version. I understand
Anyone that takes any windows box and doesn't put it behind a decent firewall is asking for trouble.. new windows or old.
Anyone that takes any windows box and doesn't put it behind a decent firewall is asking for trouble.. new windows or old.
this is only useful if your firewall sufficiently blocks OUTGOING connection any modern router acts sufficiently as an incoming connection "firewall" simply by not NAT-ing connections to any of the machines past it..
as an example:
do you have firewall rules in place to limit outgoing connections to perhaps only: 80, 443, 22, 23 (or perhaps others for imap, etc)? if not the firewall is ineffective at preventing your machine from joining a bot net.
Deepend wrote to fusion <=-
32 bit software let alone release an entirely 32bit version. I
understand the use in this case with dos door games and such. But why
run a current OS when you don't need to. In most cases running an
older OS and only exposing what is required for your BBS to the
internet.
Anyone that takes any windows box and doesn't put it behind
a decent firewall is asking for trouble.. new windows or old.
Nightfox wrote to Deepend <=-
It seems there's still a lot of 32-bit software out there. Developers also might not want to build & test separate 32-bit and 64-bit versions
of their software for now.
fusion wrote to Deepend <=-
do you have firewall rules in place to limit outgoing connections to perhaps only: 80, 443, 22, 23 (or perhaps others for imap, etc)? if not the firewall is ineffective at preventing your machine from joining a
bot net.
Arelor wrote to fusion <=-
Consumer-grade firewalls usually have some sort of automated port forwarding setup (unpn, for example). This matters less nowadays with CG-NAT being deployed in so many places, but a rogue computer in a home LAN can actually open ports for incomming connections. This is serious crazy shit in my book.
Also, limiting outgoing traffic to standard ports does not really work because there are all sorts of tunneling and badstuff you can do with
just a single outgoing port allowed . I can host a command server for a botnet on port 80 or 443 and none would be the wiser. If you are
serious about filtering outgoing connections you need to force them through proxies, application level firewalls , deep package inspectors
or whatever have you.
That said, I used to filter Microsoft machines which were trying to
call home and it was great fun when my father's Skype would fail to
load advertisements.
Agreed. While I was setting up the office network I connected to one
of the external IPs with my corporate Windows laptop (with all of the security bells and whistles) and somehow got infected to the point that Carbon Black, our security management platform, quarantined my system
when I got the network up. I had to re-image it.
For home, another option might be to run one of the DNSaaS providers like OpenDNS/Cisco Umbrella, I think they might do some malicious DNS blocking as well as parental controls, file sharing, social network and so on.
For home, another option might be to run one of the DNSaaS providers like OpenDNS/Cisco Umbrella, I think they might do som
malicious DNS blocking as well as parental controls, file sharing, social network and so on.
http://www.operationalsecurity.es/categoty/computer_magazines.html
It might make a nice pfSense box. We just took our pfSense firewall out
of service at work, replaced it with a Fortinet firewall, and I'm
missing playing with pfSense.
Tracker1 wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
ufw is the first thing I do to an online linux system even, right after moving SSH to a non-standard port.
Tracker1 wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-
PiHole on a Raspberry Pi is yet another option... Plan is to configure
my router to reroute outbound port 53 (from anything but the pihole) to the pihole box... this way even apps/services that try to circumvent
the device will still go through it for dns resolution.
ufw is the first thing I do to an online linux system even, right after
moving SSH to a non-standard port.
We have all of our ssh ports at work behind VPNs; I'm assuming
responsibility for a recent acquisitions assets. Had to debug an SSH issue recently and when I tailed /var/log/secure, it had failed root access attempts every couple of seconds.
PiHole on a Raspberry Pi is yet another option... Plan is to configure
my router to reroute outbound port 53 (from anything but the pihole) to
the pihole box... this way even apps/services that try to circumvent
the device will still go through it for dns resolution.
I have pihole running on a VM at home, and that combined with OpenDNS and
DNS redirection happening on my DD-WRT router, makes for a pretty nice home network setup.
| Sysop: | deepend |
|---|---|
| Location: | Calgary, Alberta |
| Users: | 257 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 59:39:13 |
| Calls: | 1,792 |
| Files: | 4,168 |
| D/L today: |
6 files (1,004K bytes) |
| Messages: | 395,167 |