Window XP service pack 2.

[cybertalus]

Looks like all of SP2, since some programs are listed as not being able to be installed. While there are some programs that require Net access to install (and could thus be interrupted by the firewall), most don't, so it's probably something else in SP2 that is breaking them.

And yeah, ZoneAlarm got smacked hard by SP2. More disturbing in general though is the fact that third party firewalls seem to be the largest category on the list.

 

[CrusaderX]

I'm happy with my third-party Firewall and Pop-up Blocker. And I don't mind manually scanning for patches and updates. And with my anti-virus software protection, I've never been hit with a virus (*knocks on wood*).

Do I really need SP2? It seems that most of the features it offers, I already get elsewhere.

 

[wingsandsword]

Hmm, incompatible with Zone Alarm and Firefox (among many others), my browser of choice because I don't like IE, and I don't trust MS for security?. Y'know, if I didn't know better, I'd swear MS is trying to get people to stop using competing products by changing their OS to be incompatible.

I already get a popup blocker with Firefox, I've already got a firewall, I don't use Outlook for e-mail, so why should I bother with SP2?

I trust Zone Alarm far more than I trust any firewall that MS includes, at least Zone Alarm lets me give individual programs access rights, I just don't like XP's tendency to have every program dialing home so often. I've never had reliability problems by being strict with what programs access the net.

That and I read on the BBC that one of the quieter changes in SP2 is how it keeps a log of the source of every file you download from anywhere. Windows having integral spyware and having a secret tally of every file I've downloaded (and possibly reporting it back to Microsoft) sounds almost Orwellian. It's already hard enough to be privacy minded with Windows without that.

I guess this means I'll skip SP2.

 

[Jeremy]

Hmm, incompatible with Zone Alarm and Firefox (among many others), my browser of choice because I don't like IE, and I don't trust MS for security?. Y'know, if I didn't know better, I'd swear MS is trying to get people to stop using competing products by changing their OS to be incompatible.

On the other hand, as Microsoft doesn't have the source code for Zone Alarm and Firefox, it's hard to lock down the security holes in ways that don't impact their programs as they are trying to plug the same holes. But I'm sure that like norton they are working on patches that will work with the new changes.

I already get a popup blocker with Firefox, I've already got a firewall, I don't use Outlook for e-mail, so why should I bother with SP2?

For the other security fixes or hotfixes that have been finished being tested and rolled into SP2? I don't know. For continuing compatibility with any further security bulletins that are released? But I certainly understand your trepidations and would encourage you if you feel such to allow the 3rd party developers to catch up and more public testing and possible patches to be released.

I trust Zone Alarm far more than I trust any firewall that MS includes, at least Zone Alarm lets me give individual programs access rights, I just don't like XP's tendency to have every program dialing home so often. I've never had reliability problems by being strict with what programs access the net.

The Windows Firewall has the same ability now and I'm not sure if you've seen otherwise, but so far on my computer, the firewall, active x security improvements, and pop up stopping has been blocking Microsoft code from executing as well unless I allow it. So I'd guess you can continue to regulate what programs have access to the net.

That and I read on the BBC that one of the quieter changes in SP2 is how it keeps a log of the source of every file you download from anywhere. Windows having integral spyware and having a secret tally of every file I've downloaded (and possibly reporting it back to Microsoft) sounds almost Orwellian. It's already hard enough to be privacy minded with Windows without that.

I've read/heard nothing of the kind. Got a link? That sounds unfounded to me. But I've been wrong before.

 

[wingsandsword]

I've read/heard nothing of the kind. Got a link? That sounds unfounded to me. But I've been wrong before.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/3583860.stm

In the sidebar about "SP2 Changes" (which is a standard sidebar they use for all stories about SP2), one entry on that list is "Origins of downloaded files logged".

 

[Jeremy]

It looks like they pulled that sidebar from this page:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/features.mspx

Internet Explorer download monitoring

Warns you about potentially harmful downloads and gives you the option to block files that could be malicious.



Is the change it appears to be addressing. Which only pops up a line in the info bar or a dialog box asking if you have purposely requested a file be downloaded.

I don't see any reporting file changes or any reason microsoft would be interested in what people are downloading. The only logging information that Microsoft tends to collect are the bug check or crash information when a program must be closed and that's anonymous. Just so Microsoft knows which programs are crashing and why to see which lines of code they need to write updates for.

But again, I could be wrong. I don't see anything about reporting downloaded files, and I don't recall it coming up when they were covering changes in SP2.

 

[Jeremy]

I also saw bits on downloaded files over here...

A file you download from the Web—for example, a game, a picture, or even a program—can be just what you bargained for, or it can be a vehicle for more malevolent intent. For this reason, Internet Explorer has stepped up its scrutiny of any file you begin to download, open, or save from the Web. Internet Explorer checks to see whether the file is the type of file it says it is and provides strong warnings if there are irregularities in how the file describes itself or if there seems to be a potential for harm based on the particular type of file (as shown in the following image). Internet Explorer also offers more concise information to help you understand the implications of opening or saving a file.

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/ieoeoverview.mspx

But I still don't see anything about logging or reporting on downloaded files.