Comments on: PeerGuardian 2 beta released

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 21 Apr 2005 03:50:25 +0000

PG2 logs accepted packets too and a lot more stuff besides (at least in the latest versions) – maybe this was posted about one of the early betas??

and the previous poster seemed to be a little paranoid that posters are suggesting Protowall does something malicious. I don’t think anyone was implying that. (I guess the previous poster was someone involved in Protowall and was offended by a suggestion that wasn’t actually made???)

Well… either way… both are great applications.

But with the latest changes, PG2 definetely seems to be stepping ahead, personally I can’t comment on Protowall from personal use as I couldn’t get it working on XP without connectivity problems. (probably my fault though)

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 27 Feb 2005 21:31:08 +0000

If you put protowall and PG2 on the same system, protowall blocks packets before pg2 does.

The fact that you state you should have a firewall to log connections kind of makes me think methlabs folks couldn’t get PG2 to log granted and still keep the cpu/memory usage low. Protowall logs ALL traffic and cpu usage is almost always 0 on my system.

Is it being suggested that protowall is doing something in secret simply because its not open source? Open sourcing is only going to great headaches for methlabs as people will just repackage pg2 with spyware and trojans and stuff. In fact they’ve already experienced this already.

Bottom line, don’t give the advice to use a firewall if you want granted packets to be logged. Get in there and code the ability to log granted packets just as protowall logs granted packets.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Feb 2005 13:04:30 +0000

Server problems have been fixed, and Beta2 has been released

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 26 Feb 2005 13:03:54 +0000

Since you seem so “on top” of things, then you should already know that PeerGuardian and Protowall both make obvious claims that they are NOT firewalls, and should not be used in place of a firewall.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 20:43:22 +0000

we’re working on it!

mac/linux version is coming

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 17:46:45 +0000

thanks for the reply I will check out
since I started out using the “old” peer guardian and switched to protowall due to the fact that the old pg was a resource hog and pw seemed to filter more types of protocols.

I like the fact that its open source, should speed up development

now it would be great if there could be something like this for osx
my Mac buddies are always bitching they have no such software =))
ok either than “little snitch”

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 14:42:41 +0000

more or less the same features, same blocking capability, although it doesn’t keep a log of all connections

however your firewall should do this anyway

you should be no less safe with this than with protowall, but its a bit easier to manage and use. in addition it is open source so you can be sure that its not doing something secret that you dont want it to do

still server problems at methlabs though…!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 14:30:42 +0000

Which is a bit of a pain to install
but works great

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 12:59:57 +0000

everyone needs a professional firewall – full stop

this is a BETA release of software that is still not quite complete
dont forget its OPEN SOURCE so you can always code it in yourself (it should be easy) or wait until we do

the key of this software is a far more efficiant back end than other software, much faster and more efficiant etc

try it, but if you dont have a firewall then an IP blocker is not going to help you!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 06:34:02 +0000

NOTE! you still have to manually put guardingp2p in list! or at least i did. tryed connecting to mp** and ouch it did .i exported blocklist managers list into Peerguardian-2’s “list”folder >i had placed gardingp2p there and overwrote it. everything working great! 0-2 % CPU usage. and no bandwidth loss as with other programs [not naming] don’t want to open up a can of worms here.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 25 Feb 2005 04:18:35 +0000

No granted packets logged?

So how to find out what was hitting you when one gets busted ?

So everyone needs a professional firewall to keep track?

great help to find the bad guys…. (not)

I was hoping someone making an ip-blocker would at least think of that…

I’ll stick with PW and the bluetack guys, they seem so much more on top of it all…