Microsoft Crippling VISTA,2008 and 7

I don't & mainly because of these 2 security features Microsoft has PULLED (port filtering) &/or crippled (for efficiency in HOSTS files) shouldn't be & yet, are.

----

1.) The removal of being able to use 0 as a blocking IP address in a HOSTS file

(vs. 0.0.0.0 or 127.0.0.1, which are bigger, slower on load into the local DNS Cache (as well as slower flushes via ipconfig /flushdns) & also occupy more RAM once loaded, for NO GOOD REASON - 0 blocks as well as the other 2 do, & is smaller + faster!)

In this case, this happened on 12/09/2008 Microsoft "Patch Tuesday" updates, it wasn't LIKE that before then!

E.G.-> Here, using 0 as my blocking IP address in a FULLY normalized (meaning no repeated entries) HOSTS file with nearly 650,000 bad sites blocked in it, I get a 14++mb sized HOSTS file... using 0.0.0.0 it shoots up to 18++mb in size (& even worse using 127.0.0.1, to around the tune of 24++mb in size)... Here? This is SENSELESS bloat creation as the result!

&

2.) The removal of IP Port Filtering GUI controls for it via Local Network Connections properties "ADVANCED" section

(This is up there w/ when MS removed the GUI checkbox after NT 4.0 for IP Forwarding, only, this time, the difference is (and, it's a PAIN) is that it is NOT a single 1 line entry to hack via regedit.exe, but FAR MORE COMPLEX to do by hand)... Port Filtering is a USEFUL & POWERFUL security (& to a degree, speed also) enhancing feature!

Afaik, on THIS case (vs. #1 above)? It has always been that way in VISTA &/or Windows Server 2008... & not just the result of a Patch Tuesday modification.

----

QUESTION: Do ANY of you folks have an answer, a GOOD SOLID TECHNICAL answer, as to WHY these cripplings have been implemented in VISTA, Server 2008, & most likely their descendant, in Windows 7?

See - I posted on Microsoft/Mr. Sinofsky's (?) blog -> http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/25/feedback-and-engineering-windows-7.aspx

AND, I have YET to get a SOLID TECHNICAL ANSWER on those things going on in VISTA, Server 2008, & probably Windows 7 as well, that justify doing so...

(They're things I'd really LIKE to get an answer to, as to WHY Microsoft has done the 2 things in my list above, to the above noted versions of Windows)

APK

P.S.=> I found the (imo) rather flimsy reasoning behind WHY the PORT FILTERING gui controls were allegedly removed in Windows VISTA, Server 2008, & Windows 7, after consulting with Mr. Mitch Tulloch ( http://www.windowsnetworking.com/Mitch_Tulloch/ ) ... here tis:

From Chapter 27 of the Vista Resource Kit that explains the rationale for removing the TCP/IP Filtering UI:

----

"Windows XP Service Pack 2 actually has three different firewalling (or network traffic filtering) technologies that you can separately configure, and which have zero
interaction with each other:

Windows Firewall that was first introduced in Service Pack 2

TCP/IP Filtering, which is accessed from the Options tab of the Advanced
TCP/IP Properties sheet for the network connection

IPsec rules and filters, which you can create using the IPsec Security
Policy Management MMC snap-in

On top of this confusion, Windows Server 2003 Service Pack 1 had a fourth network traffic filtering technology that you could use: the Routing and Remote Access Service(RRAS), which supported basic firewall and packet filteringthe problem, of course, is that when more than one of these firewalls is configured on a computer, one firewall can block traffic that another allows"

----

Lame reasoning imo!

I say this, because it is TRIVIAL to create exceptions rules in most any software (or hardware based) firewall generally, & to match that in Port Filtering is quite simple also (even easier imo, provided you know what port's involved, & that's what the IANA lists are for, after all).

AND

E.G.-> Once a malware gets inside? One of the FIRST things it does, is disable a software firewall... & with NO OTHER BARRIERS IN THE WAY, such as PORT FILTERING RULES (which because they work @ an unrelated level (drivers-wise), in the IP stack, makes it an actual advantage because it cannot be 'taken out' from a single point of attack (though, perhaps MS is saying a single point of control is the advantage in their method, it still lends itself to being taken down from a single place too by the same token - imo? A "catch-22" situation, quite possibly & MOST likely))?

I.E.-> It weakens the concept of "Layered Security"... especially vs. say, recent attacks on services like the RPC bug in the SERVER service, for example... no more firewall (or other layers like Port Filtering) in the way, once said software firewall is down (since it works on a diff. driver level than Port Filters do)!

P.S.S.=> Mr. Tulloch ( http://www.windowsnetworking.com/Mitch_Tulloch/ ) & I are currently in progress searching for the reasoning behind the removal of 0 as a valid IP blocking address in a HOSTS file, but even HE was unaware of WHY this was done... but, with any luck? We're going to find out - &, I'll let you all know, here, if the thread isn't dead by then... apk

To whomever posted excerpts of my words on slashdot (altered ones and original ones): I am going to find out who owns this website, and contact them to have them remove it. If that fails, I will contact local law enforcement in your area to have it removed and then have all parties involved prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. You have been warned. Sincerely, APK

People, this is a person who posts as "The End of Days" over @ slashdot impersonating me here. To "the End of Days":

I see you are now impersonating me at the forums @ 4chan.org, by registering as myself there & posting excerpts of my posts here @ slashdot (some in their original form and altered ones as well from other sites also) as well as your admitting to using multiple registered accounts here (to mod yourself up and to make it appear as if you have supporters (not)).

Bad move:  <b>That is just going to make me go to 4chan.org's hosting provider and have them remove it, & if that fails, I will employ the local law enforcement in their area to do so and to prosecute you as well, & strangely I think it's going to go FEDERAL pal.</b>

(Oh, & by the way - I've had to do this before to a Mr. Jeremy Reimer and Mr. Jay Little of arstechnica, who had their websites @ CrystalTech.com & petitiononline.com removed in their entirety or in large portions & was completely successful in exposing those 2 for the same type of garbage you are pulling here on this site and over @ 4chan.org):

http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1235936964/1-40

<b>I came across this impersonation of myself online</b> (via cuts & pastes of my posts here & from other websites, some original, some altered) <b>right after I posted about Windows VISTA, Server 2008, & Windows 7 removing port filtering and also making it impossible to use a 0 inside of a HOSTS file to block out bad IP addresses.</b> -> http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1143349&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=27012231

<b>This impersonation of myself "oddly" seems to have happened only after when I also caught one of your own here @ slashdot, "The End of Days"</b> -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1147437&cid=27056793 <b> caught admitting to using multiple registered accounts to "mod himself up" here and to use those same registered accounts to mod down others</b> (on top of his use of ac submissions as well to also make it appear he has further supporters).

<b>The "The End of Days": I would be a bit worried now were I you, because now it's going to go out of my hands @ this point</b>, & you're the only person who might have any reason to do so. Now, I will just go to the hosting provider involved for that website to take care of it, & if I get resistance of any kind, <b>I will prosecute yourself, and any others involved, to the fullest extent of the law.</b>

Heh, it looks like this is truly "the end of days" of you being online, period, much less you constantly bothering others here or elsewhere online via your bogus methods of impersonating others or posting under diff. account names here & at other forums in order to do so. You only bring this on yourself, & it only takes me minutes to take care of.

APK

P.S.=> It's one thing to shame yourself here being caught admitting to using multiple registered accounts to mod yourself up with (something us ac's can never be accused of) but, to go & impersonate me there has legal implications, and that is just plain dumb... I have no pity for you here, this is a lesson you will have to learn just as Jeremy Reimer &/or Jay Little of arstechnica had to before (my friends & family suspect it is they once more, but I'll reserve judgement on that until the law & hosting providers do their end of it)... apk

Never mind, I hereby give you all rights to my IP.

To whom it may concern:

 +1-559-650-8111 <- I attempted to call you folks today, in regards to being
impersonated by someone posting as myself on what appears to be a website
hosted by your company, here ->
http://dis.4chan.org/read/prog/1235936964/1-40 according to this page ->
http://tools.whois.net/index.php?fuseaction=whois.whoisbyipresults

I respectfully request that this all be removed, else, I will have to
contact law enforcement in your area to assist in this matter, per your
companies' information locating you in FRESNO california ->
http://start.cortera.com/company/research/k5k1qsp9s/netasset/

I take this completely seriously, as I hope you do.

Alexander Peter Kowalski
apk4776239@hotmail.com
apk

P.S.=> If possible, the identity of the person responsible would be nice to have from your end given me also... apk

Disregard that, I suck cocks.

1 of you asked a reasonable question above/earlier:

"So let me pose you this question: Why does one who as as adept as you in the area of computer security use Hotmail, and then proceed to give his email address to the snarling wolves of the internet?"

Ever heard of honeypots?

Well - It's sort of like that, because it attracts said "wolves" (script kiddie chumps is more like it, lol) easily, as you state, because a weasel can't help but be a weasel (their nature, how sad & pitiful) & then they get reported to PHISHTANK (or other like sites that report spamming etc. et al) or, worse (hello "The End of Days" from /.).

Understand?

As far as giving my IP addy away, as hotmail.com does in its headers (or @ least it used to) in addition to my email addy (a throwaway one I use for conversing w/ the public only)?

Same drill, because I know my system cannot be 'assaulted' by the 'packs of script kiddie fleas' out there, because it is thus secured:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=7c517d47d5b906b177155dc0fb494a3c&t=28430&page=3

Where I have people literally using that guide's steps I wrote up to secure themselves, showing no malware infestations whatsoever in 1++ yr.'s time thusfar!

(Thronka there is a prime example, I can easily produce others experiencing the same in case you are interested).

In fact, & this very practice for one of your own posting here is going to work out badly for the person impersonating me here, unfortunately (by whatever means I have to use to pursue it, this will graduate depending on what I see as results from the hosting provider here and the website owner here) as they have been posting as myself?

He was easily "roped in" to doing this, & it's not my 1st rodeo here in this capacity boys... fools of that nature ARE easy to get to destroy themselves.

E.G.-> A Jeremy Reimer &/or Jay Little of arstechnica tried the same thing a few years ago & were caught in the act impersonating myself AND others (Martin Meszaros for one, an online pal of mine from years past) & articles of Dr. Mark Russinovich @ Windows IT Pro can show anyone the same!

(Which where I put up 12 points that Dr. Mark R. was unable to disprove, though I spotted & fixed an error in his work, to which he agreed he was "off" on & thanked me for in pagedefrag.exe ontop of those points)

And, ones such as the one by Jay Little claiming he was an "expert on exchange" & he did not realize that MS recommends memory optimization programs to get halted Exchange Servers (due to memory fragmentation) going again, & this was a similar problem in FireFox also (& many other apps I had noted & had documented evidence of)).

Now, you can call me "expert", but, I am just a guy who can "get the job done", & that's MY estimation of myself.

However, this post of yours fellas, where SOMEONE here (who I am fairly certain @ this point I know who they are now from my 'research' into this matter, bgp baby) is impersonating me here now online?

Guys... it's not going to go well for you, whoever is impersonating me now here, & I don't WANT anyone to get into a hassle, but... you're heading that way, quite possibly with the law, but we will see how it goes.

I.E.-> I've written this website's hosting provider, & am waiting for a response. If resistance from GIL (hosting provider owner of this site) occurs, that is when the FRESNO law enforcement gets involved, & if that fails me? Other means are possible & there is no way in hell you guys could stop me from blowing this site down off the wire making it impossible for you all to access, if I wished, & I think you all KNOW how that is done.

I would rather not do that, because it takes me down to the level of online scum!

AND, yes, that is EXACTLY how I had Jay Little's website taken down from CrystalTech.com & also petitiononline.com, minus what I COULD really do (& Jeremy Reimer of arstechnica had large portions of his website removed also).

I.E.-> Nobody will publish Reimer's articles, because of it, @ least no one reputable because of his antics there, and the fact he is no authority on computing @ all & merely regurgitates what others have written really... & he only blew it for himself and had his site torn up (not as bad as Jay Little, but enough for me to prove a point).

The sites that used to publish his 'articles' (loosely using said term)? Many won't anymore. Reimer has no degrees or certs in this art & science, and certainly no years to decades of hands on experience in them either & it shows. Thus, he bought his own farm, as I know this affects his income adversely.

Jay Little? He is now being seen being kicked repeatedly out of msdn & technet forums (posting as Jay Little, & later Mr. Jay) for it as well for the same type of behaviours.

We've probably ALL been 'kicked/banned' from a forum now & then, I know I have, but you really can't hold anyone out on forums (which I am sure again, you all know).

Anyhow - If the person who impersonated me here wants to become some "online pariah/leper" like those two?

You're heading in that direction unfortunately... & only doing it to yourself.

APK

P.S.=> It really is too bad you people are acting this way, because I am conferencing now w/ folks from WindowsNetworking.com & other places, and we are confronting MS on this, hopefully to get a FAR better Windows 7, than VISTA was, & every bit helps... apk

As far as calling me a "stupid fucker"? You missed where I covered all of that here:

http://www.xtremepccentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=7c517d47d5b906b177155dc0fb494a3c&t=28430&page=3

So much for you saying "You're a stupid fucker" to me.

APK (the real one, not whomever is posting as me here)

As far as calling me a "stupid fucker"?

You missed where I covered all of that here (as far as how the DNS api works):

http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/25/feedback-and-engineering-windows-7.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage

Again - So much for you saying "You're a stupid fucker" to me. I suspect you read that from the URL above, & now have tried to say I did not cover that much!

APK

P.S.=> Give us a break, & thank you to the person who said:

"Thanks APK for fighting the good cause.  I fucking hate bullshit like four digit blocking IPs."

apk

LOL, loved THIS one:

"Upmodded for someone actually knowing what they're talking about."

Sure, after he read me & others who are confronting MS with this data, saying that here -> http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/25/feedback-and-engineering-windows-7.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage

APK

Someone also said this:

"I think this is some guy mimicking APK and doing it perfectly. Because not even APK would give a reply like >>36, would he?"

& no, that's NOT me.

It is this guy "The End of Days" I have caught admitting to posting under multiple registered accounts over @ /. (slashdot for you "non-*NIX" oriented folks) here who has been hassling me there all week during discussions involving that which we are discussing here (PORT FILTERING REMOVAL & HOSTS files being unable to use 0 as a blocking IP address in Windows VISTA/Server 2008/Windows 7).

I had to "push some buttons" to get him to 'spill', but he eventually did, here:

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1154933&threshold=-1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=27137671

Where he literally admitted to having multiple registered accounts there to "mod up" his posts with, himself no less!

(That means giving them 'kudos' there basically - there is no reason to have multiple logons there other than that really!) & he then admits to posting as myself here also...

LAME!

However, using them to constantly give me guff? I have my limits, & now it's time to apply pressure in his direction he has NO IDEA about imo, & he's only doing himself in.

Some people are what I call "not men" online, other folks call them wussies & punks (high school girl gossipers, you decide) who think they're untouchable online.

Ask Jeremy Reiemr &/or Jay Little whom I noted above, as to what happens to that when you grab the WRONG tiger by the tail. It's unfortunate, but... here we go!

APK

P.S.=> I am currently in process of 'catching him' & he's gone silent there now, because I am almost SURE I know who it is now (the guy has problems) & he is only doing himself in there even more now, & his going silent there now? Too late... apk

Stop making fun of me because I'm a furfag.

APK

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1147437&cid=27066233

More of this "End of Days" dolt impersonating me there, and admitting to his nefarious use of multiple registered accounts there.

I have little if ANY doubt @ this point that it is here impersonating me here.

APK

P.S.=> Too bad some people never learn & are in fact stupid, but, then again? When all you have done with your life is waste it bugging others, instead of improving yourself AND others' lives? I guess animals like he are the result, how lame & sad... apk

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1147437&cid=27056793

Even more, a direct admittance of that person who is impersonating myself here, and the "why" of it... lol, because he was caught posting as multiple users by myself @ slashdot!

(Which is QUITE lame, and you guys know the type I am talking about. It's one thing to 'sneak back in' to a forums you've been unjustly kicked from, because of 'cronyism' etc. et al, but, quite another to use multiple identities to gang up on others or to mod yourself up with as well on forums, which he obviously does in having multiple registered accounts on slashdot for).

APK

P.S.=> He's out of MY hands @ this point, I handed it over to this sites HOSTING PROVIDER, & I will await their reply in removing the fool's posts here while he impersonated myself, & if that doesn't go? There is the law in FRESNO ca., because that's where the hosting provider for this website is located. I try to follow the law, FIRST, & it usually doesn't fail me (again, ask Jeremy Reimer &/or Jay Little of arstechnica.com about that, lol)... apk

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1147437&cid=27056793

Even more, a direct admittance of that person who is impersonating myself here, and the "why" of it... lol, because he was caught posting as multiple users by myself @ slashdot!

(Which is QUITE lame, and you guys know the type I am talking about. It's one thing to 'sneak back in' to a forums you've been unjustly kicked from, because of 'cronyism' etc. et al, but, quite another to use multiple identities to gang up on others or to mod yourself up with as well on forums, which he obviously does in having multiple registered accounts on slashdot for).

APK

LOL, loved THIS one:

"Upmodded for someone actually knowing what they're talking about."

Sure, after he read me & others who are confronting MS with this data, saying that here -> http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/25/feedback-and-engineering-windows-7.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage

APK

LOL, loved THIS one:

"Upmodded for someone actually knowing what they're talking about."

Sure, after he read me & others who are confronting MS with this data, saying that here -> http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/25/feedback-and-engineering-windows-7.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage

APK

Man, talk about childish, but here goes, to this little tidbit here someone said above:

----

>>86
You're Gay

----

NO sorry I am not. If this disappoints you, then I do NOT know what to tell you, other than "find yourself another dish, I am not on the menu"...

APK

>>1
Because 0 isn't an IP address and hosts files aren't meant to store thousands of entries. That's a DNS server job.

----

To THAT little tidbit from "someone" here? I can only point you to where even Microsoft's folks have nothing valid to say in response vs. it (not really, & not on all the points I noted):

http://blogs.msdn.com/e7/archive/2009/02/25/feedback-and-engineering-windows-7.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage

Especially considering that TODAY? Microsoft issued 2-3 patches to the DNS SERVER, & DJBDNS was found with holes in it only 2-3 days ago also, & Dan Kaminsky set the entire internet into a frenzy finding problems in BIND DNS & others like it only recently also.

Give up already "The End of Days"... you are only digging your hole deeper, & if you think that using TOR (onion routers), or other means of "anonymizing" yourself will help?

Boy, are YOU in for a surprise pal... bgp!

APK