AstroSkipper
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by AstroSkipper
-
Unfortunately, the very, very old version Comodo Firewall 2.4 from 2007 does not offer all features in comparison with Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP from 2016. For example, it lacks IP6 support. This feature was only introduced starting with the version Comodo Firewall 5.3.174622.1216 from 2011. That means Comodo Firewall 2.4 is only an option for those users whose internet provider does not offer or does not use the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6). For better overview, I have updated my article about Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP in terms of offered features, download links and screenshots.
-
If you had read my post carefully, you would have noticed that I didn't say that this behaviour seems to be "unique" to my referenced Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP. I also used Comodo Firewall in the past. It was and is certainly still a good firewall but Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP did all I needed better in a more comfortable way and very low on consuming resources. It's as simple as that. BTW, I will write an article about the standalone Comodo Firewall soon. But testing it in these days must be left to others, as I have already explained in one of my last posts.
-
One reason I am using Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP is that this firewall not only blocks incoming and outgoing connections from programmes, but also from Microsoft's operating system components. This firewall simply blocks everything that the user wants blocked. I used the Avast Premier 2018 firewall myself for a long time, but it kept letting through connections that I hadn't authorised. This prompted me to disable it completely, i.e. not install it in the first place, and replace it with Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP. I really don't know why I had these issues with the Avast Premier 2018 firewall. However, I think that firewalls which come with Internet Security packages are not that powerful as single, specialised ones. And Windows 10 Firewall Control Plus XP is very specialised and mighty, especially when it comes to the creation of own rules and zones. Just my opinion based on my experiences I made in the past.
-
One thing seems to be clear. It's better to have blocked incoming connections, even if suspicious, than outgoing ones. The latter would mean your computer is compromised by malware or other intruders.
-
I forgot to ask whether your Windows XP computer is part of a network and still other devices are connected to it? Does your router keep logs of all connections?
-
Ok. In any case, it was an incoming connection at the local port 3389 and blocked by Avast. The corresponding service was disabled by you anyways. And Avast did its job. So, nothing bad could happen. Personally, I always disable all remote features from the very first. To use a properly working firewall which reports all blocked incoming and outgoing connections is mandatory and as we can see necessary and meaningful.
-
Thanks for your confirmation in terms of the firewall! About Comodo Antivirus, we will see what other users report here.
-
Any special setting in your hosts file? Local address 0.0.0.0 usually leads to nowhere. BTW, my condolences on the outcome of the sporting event.
-
Not necessarily. The Comodo Firewall 8.4.0.5165 was indeed reported as the last error-free version when it comes to the pure firewall. The version 12.0.0.6818 was reported as the last error-free, XP-compatible release of Comodo Antivirus, though. But tests are still necessary to see how these versions behave under Windows XP today.
-
Thank you once again for the upload! I was already aware of all important and useful command line options for the MSI files from here: https://msfn.org/board/topic/143810-comodo-internet-security-4/?do=findComment&comment=922021 Actually, I was looking for the file cispremium_only_installer.exe in the version 10.2.0.6514. Regarding the x86 and x64 MSI files, they can even be downloaded from the Comodo servers in these days. The cispremium_only_installer.exe in the version 10.2.0.6526 was archived and is available via the Wayback Machine. The Comodo Cleanup tools have already been downloaded by me for a complete uninstall if necessary. But in any case, thanks for your efforts!
-
Thank you very much for the upload! And don't be worried, I won't ask you where you found it! @genieautravail Are there other installer versions available from your source? There is one other version I am also interested in, It is the file cispremium_only_installer.exe in the version 10.2.0.6514. Only if it doesn’t cause any trouble, of course. And only if you are not at work.
-
The installer cispremium_only_installer.exe inside the zip archive is definitely the original one. I already extracted it and checked its content.
-
Thank you very much for the upload! And don't be worried, I won't ask you where you found it!
-
You're welcome. BTW, you can vote for a new Mypal 68 SSE release in this thread here like @exogenesis did or on GitHub.
-
Mypal 68.13.8b release for SSE 32-bit: https://codeberg.org/Theodor2/Mypal68/releases/download/68.13.8b/mypal-68.13.8.en-US.win32.zip
-
ProxHTTPSProxy and HTTPSProxy in Windows XP for future use
AstroSkipper replied to AstroSkipper's topic in Windows XP
Then try to modify one of @heinoganda's releases ProxHTTPSProxy REV3d, ProxHTTPSProxy REV3e or my package ProxHTTPSProxy's PopMenu 3V1. All of them can be found with their download links in the section 11.1. Archived Downloads {obsolete} and 11.2.1.1. Downloads related to ProxHTTPSProxy of my main article. AFAIK, all versions were built with Python 3.4. And this is the download link of ProxHTTPSProxy REV3e's and ProxHTTPSProxy's PopMenu 3V1's source code: https://www.mediafire.com/file/s9027bdxffodbna/cryptography-2.8-py3.4_openssl-1.1.1d.rar/file -
ProxHTTPSProxy and HTTPSProxy in Windows XP for future use
AstroSkipper replied to AstroSkipper's topic in Windows XP
Try ProxHTTPSProxyMII 1.3a! It is an old version created by the original developer. Here is a download link: http://www.proxfilter.net/proxhttpsproxy/ProxHTTPSProxyMII 1.3a.zip Or ProxHTTPSProxyMII 1.5. Download link: http://jjoe.proxfilter.net/ProxHTTPSProxyMII/files/ProxHTTPSProxyMII 1.5 advanced 34cx_freeze5.0.1urllib3v1.22Win32OpenSSL_Light-1_0_2o-1_1_0h.zip AFAIK, both versions were built with Python 3.4. More can be read in my main article. There are further links for information. BTW, these versions are pure proxies without the PopMenu and my self-created programmes. They are original releases from their developers. -
ProxHTTPSProxy and HTTPSProxy in Windows XP for future use
AstroSkipper replied to AstroSkipper's topic in Windows XP
Maybe, an old SSL Proxy could help. Or a very old version of ProxHTTPSProxy where SSL3 is not disabled. Just ideas. As far as I know, OpenSSL supports SSLv3, at least in older versions. -
Would be great if you saved it in the past. FileHippo has become bad the last years. It was great but now it is crap. The file is only a linker (1.6MB) and no offline installer. From FileHippo one can't get any meaningful these days.
-
But that doesn't exactly inspire confidence.
-
Actually, I am quite good in finding old installers. But one of them I can't find, even via Wayback Machine. It is the offline installer of Comodo Internet Security Premium 10.1. This is the free version of CIS. Does anyone have that file saved on their disk? Or a working download link? The exact version may be 10.1.0.6474 or 10.1.0.6476. The file size is round about 67MB. The original file name was as usual cispremium_only_installer.exe. Online installers for these versions can be found easily but do not work anymore.
-
Thanks for your suggestion! What do you exactly mean by "it was a little capricious under XP"?
-
ProxHTTPSProxy and HTTPSProxy in Windows XP for future use
AstroSkipper replied to AstroSkipper's topic in Windows XP
SSL3 is a very old protocol and actually abandoned (and therefore unsupported). Where and what for do you want to create such a connection? Do you refer to ProxHTTPSProxy? The idea of ProxHTTPSProxy is actually to establish a TLS 2.0 or even a TLS 3.0 connection where this is natively not possible by using more recent cipher suites via a HTTPSProxy. But I think you surely already know that. -
That was the actual call. I need information especially regarding Comodo Antivirus in terms of its definition updates. Does Comodo Antivirus 12.0.0.6818 or another XP-compatible version that I may not yet have on my radar still receive definition updates on a regular base in these days?
-
It's time to post on topic again.