I just took the grc shields up test, with just my hardware firewall, and i got perfects on everything, full stealth mode

does that mean that i have no need for a software firewall (guarddog,firestarter,etc.) ??

assuming it is indeed completely stealth (i don't know if "grc shields up" checks *every* port), it depends... it's kind of subjective... how many PCs do you have behind the dedicated ("hardware") firewall?? if it's just one, then a host-based ("software") firewall might be kinda redundant... but then again, it could save your box if your router gets rooted... and of course if you have several boxes behind your firewall then host-based firewalls would be a good idea, in order to provide protection on the LAN itself, in case any boxes get rooted behind the dedicated firewall...

I don't think Shields Up! tests every port by default, just the ones up to about 1024 or a little beyond.

BTW, which "hardware firewall" are you using?

Shields up can, as I recall from my last visit, be made to scan every available port. It is, IMHO one of the better port scanners out there. Only catch is, aside from doing the standard scan of the first 1000 ports or whatever the number is, the remainder up to 65535 can only be checked 64 at a time :O

Personally I would still have firewalls running on any of my machines, there are other ways that can still be a threat to your network.

For example, you could receive an email that contains a virus or worm, a firewall setup the right way may help to stop or atleast minimise the damage that a virus/worm could do to your network while it tries to propagate through your network.

I have the builtin firewall on my router, and it is in full stealth mode.

I have this linux desktop , and two wireless windows machines on the network.

What is your router?

What is its "built in" firewall.

Although Steve Gibson & Leo Laporte will say that any old NATing home router will provide 90% of the security of a "real" dedicated firewall, there is still a difference.


How good is your wireless security vis-à-vis the wired portion of your LAN?


Personally, I run SmoothWall Express w/ no wireless attached, no firewall or anti-anything package on even my girlfriend's W2k box. That we have no problems is a testament to the adage that security starts w/ the users. I am not recommending this to anyone else, I'm just pointing out that who is connecting via wireless is important in deciding your security needs.

I have a NAT router, with the firewall turned on and its in full stealth mode.

My wireless encryption is WPA, and i have changed the default SSID and password

Forgive me if this sounds rude, but what is so hard about posting the Mfr. & Model #?

Linksys Wireless-G Broadband Router
Model No. WRT54G
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

i have a WRT54G (v3.1) at home... at the moment, i have behind it my Ubuntu 6.06 desktop, my Slackware 10.2 server, and my Ubuntu 6.10 laptop... all of the boxes are running their own host-based firewalls... my suggestion is that you do the same - some of the reasons for doing it have already been explained...

If i must use a software firewall aslo, then seriously, what is the point of having the firewalls built in with the router?

iptables can reject/allow the same things as the router can, so whats the point of having them both on?

You guys have made the point that if my router gets "rooted" , then you would have the sofware firewall to protect each individual computer. so why not jsut have software firewalls, why have the hardware firewall enabled?

nobody's said you "must use" host-based firewalls on your LAN... =/

a dedicated firewall/router doesn't do any firewalling between hosts in the same LAN zone, but host-based firewalls do... that's the main reason why you'd wanna consider using host-based firewalls in addition to your dedicated firewall...

i get it . thanks