Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Windows XP SP2 cripples P2P, Novel, others

slughead

slughead

macrumors 68040
Original poster
Apr 28, 2004
3,107
237
http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=04/08/12/169252&tid=201&tid=164

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3557952.stm

Apparently, raw socket connections (used by P2P apps) have been disabled by XP SP2.

M$ says they do this to prevent DDoS attacks (which use raw socket connections). Of course, they could just make their software more immune to viruses, but instead they choose to broadly disable an essential feature that programmers have been using for over a decade.

However, Novel also uses this, as does P2P.
 
edesignuk said:
That does it, I'm not installing it!
Click to expand...

lol yeah but a lot of us use PCs.

I just run 2000 pro on mine, it seems MS accidently created something that works OK (after you turn off windows messenger and install a Zone Alarm and adaware).
 
FW 800 in XP?

The BBC article mentions problems with FW 800. Am I missing something or since when does XP have FW 800 support?
 
slughead said:
a lot of *us* use PCs

sorry, brain fart.
Click to expand...
lol, ok :)

Yeah, I use my PC all the time. I'll probably install SP2 on an XP Pro installation in VMware first and see how I go before destroying my real system.
 
slughead said:
Apparently, raw socket connections (used by P2P apps) have been disabled by XP SP2.

M$ says they do this to prevent DDoS attacks (which use raw socket connections).
Click to expand...
Actually, this would be a GOOD thing; although DoS attacks aren't exactly my technical strong point, reading through Steve Gibson's thoughts on the matter (from Gibson Reasearch) has me inclined to believe that they're actually fixing something that was broken to begin with (which wasn't in previous versions of Windows), and may improve the experience for the rest of us once the next worm goes and infests a couple million Windows boxes.

Now, Gibson's argument is that Raw Sockets are OK, so long as they're very restricted access, but since XP home makes everybody an admin, there is no restriction. If MS has done something weird like removing access to raw sockets entirely, they may be going overboard from what reasonable people like Gibson are suggesting... but then again, considering how severe of a problem Windows infections and the attacks that can be launched from zombie computers are to EVERYBODY, I'd say that even an overkill reaction that breaks some legit programs is worth it.

Take one for the team--when Windows has a tool that can be used for ill, we ALL suffer. Wait for an update of your P2P program so the rest of the world can sleep a little safer.

Not that I think this will help stem the tide of viruses and worms much, but it's better than nothing.
 
Apparently there are already virus revisions that workaround this.

It hurts legitimate programmers more than virus programmers.

Any word on whether iTunes musicsharing works or not? I could see this being a problem.
 
I thought the only use for raw sockets was the ability to spoof an IP adress, in order to make a DoS or DDoS attack untraceable, or to do a DRDoS attack.

Distributed Reflected Denial of Service attacks, are the worst, they involve sending a SYN packet to a server, with someone else's IP adress as the source adress. This makes the server send 4 SYN/ACK packets to that adress. Now, what happens when 160 computers do this? The computer with the IP adress that has been spoofed by the other computers, gets flooded with packets. It's untraceable, because it looks like the packets are coming from the victim.

And one other thing about raw sockets: When Microsoft included them, they said it was ok, because it wasn't any different then for example, Unix having them. There is a difference. Not every Unix user has root access. Every non-restricted user on XP has root acess, and therefore can acess raw sockets. If they just made it so admins could do everything, BUT access root, then it would be ok.

That reminds me, I gots to get me an external Firewire HDD, and back up all my stuff, before installing SP2, so when the **** hits the fan (which is garuanteed with a crappy update like this), I'll be ok.

Edit: I know this dosen't effect iTunes, because I already hacked my copy of XP, and turned off raw sockets. iTunes sharing works fine.
 
slughead said:
M$ says they do this to prevent DDoS attacks (which use raw socket connections). Of course, they could just make their software more immune to viruses, but instead they choose to broadly disable an essential feature that programmers have been using for over a decade.
Click to expand...

does anyone remember the outcry when MS decided to allow all users in XP to create raw sockets (as opposed to only letting 'root'-like users create them)? quite a lot of folks who know network security were upset. this was (accurately) considered a significant security issue. now to see folks getting upset when they remove it... jeez. i'm no fan of windows, but this ain't fair.
 
Just take the network card, modem, and floppy drive out and password protect it. No need for virus protection software or firewalls. XP will be more secure and provide an excellent single player gaming system. Use your Mac for all your network and internet needs. It's the ultimate service pack for Windows.
 
Zaty said:
The BBC article mentions problems with FW 800. Am I missing something or since when does XP have FW 800 support?
Click to expand...
Most of the FW800 stuff I see says it requires Windows 2000 or OS X 10.2
I don't know if that means that 2000 supports out of the box (which I doubt) or that the only made drivers for 2k/XP.
 
Counterfit said:
Most of the FW800 stuff I see says it requires Windows 2000 or OS X 10.2
I don't know if that means that 2000 supports out of the box (which I doubt) or that the only made drivers for 2k/XP.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure XP didn't come with FW 800 support out of the box, they even added USB 2.0 and Bluetooth support later. Either native support for FW 800 was silently added with SP 1 two years ago (which is rather unlikely) or you're right and you have to insall third party drivers to use FW 800 under XP and 2000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back