Security Products

[Zxian]

How would staying with an updated SP1 leave me "seriously vulnerable"?

I've tried the SP2 slipstreaming method as well as the upgrade route, and both have only caused me problems and slowdowns. When you're sitting on a computer that isn't a high performance machine (try PIII 750, 128MB PC100 RAM), SP2 does slow things down quite a bit!

As far as I can tell, all that was done with SP2 was that all the hotfixes for SP1 were integrated, they added a "firewall", and a "security center". MS also changed some of the service startup settings so that they could close a couple of security holes (for example, Messenger spam).

I'd take a computer with SP1 and an anti-virus program and Sygate firewall over SP2 anyday.

[Obliviator]

Popular misconception: SP2 firewall protects you.

Not true! SP2 firewall does not block any outbound packets, on any port, on any transport, to any address...

Zonealarm, outpost - or any hardware firewall does

make yer choice and live with it....

Cheers,

10forcash

sp2 firewall does provide some degree of protection . i use it all the time with packet filtering also. true it doesnt protect you from outbound packets, but basic security rule: if a malicious app has access to your comp, then it's not your comp. so why does it need to filter outbound packets, if the application sending those packets can perhaps kill the firewall? btw do any of the people with about 20 security apps ever think about the hardware strain?

[un4given1]

How would staying with an updated SP1 leave me "seriously vulnerable"?

I believe your issue with SP2 is that it causes performance issues. It's ignorant to believe you are better off with SP1 and all of the updates. If that was the case wouldn't you be better off with the original GOLD disk XP with all of the updates? Who needs SP1! hehe... Back to that common sense thing....

[Zxian]

I believe your issue with SP2 is that it causes performance issues.  It's ignorant to believe you are better off with SP1 and all of the updates.  If that was the case wouldn't you be better off with the original GOLD disk XP with all of the updates?  Who needs SP1!  hehe...  Back to that common sense thing....

I'm not saying that I don't have performance issues with SP2... I do very much so.

All I'm asking is a definate answer to how Service Pack 2 is protecting my computer better than SP1 updated.

As far as I can tell (with various security checks, virus tests, etc etc), all that Service Pack 2 has added is the "in-your-face" security center for the common user and an improved firewall (which I still wouldn't trust on its own).

Also... remember when Service Pack 1 first came out? Remember how many problems it caused the world? Then a few months later, MS released Service Pack 1a, which had patched SP1's problems and all the security fixes between the two releases.

Also... please don't call me ignorant... I'm not simply stating my opinions just to have them... I've gone through several headaches to arrive at my conclusions. First hand knowledge and experiences are probably the only things that will change those opinions. Everyone has them... I could be a jerk and call everyone who uses SP2 ignorant because they're being "blinded by the new 'security' features and that it's the newest and greatest thing since sliced bread". I've heard that type of arguement all too many times, and I don't care for it in either direction.

IMHO, I don't see anything wrong with running a computer with Service Pack 1a and a good anti-virus program and firewall. If anyone can give me a definate answer (not just "because it is") as to why this is a bad idea, please tell me.

Cheers!

[un4given1]

Also... remember when Service Pack 1 first came out? Remember how many problems it caused the world? Then a few months later, MS released Service Pack 1a, which had patched SP1's problems and all the security fixes between the two releases.

This you are absolutely 100% incorrect about. Service Pack 1a is Service Pack 1 with Virtual Machine removed. When Sun won the Java battle Microsoft was forced to remove Virtual Machine.

[un4given1]

You can start with this... http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechn...n/sp2netwk.mspx

[Martin Zugec]

2Zxian: If U want to know why is SP2 better, study MS documentation first... Things like Zone Lockdown, MIME preservation etc. strongly enhance security...

BTW I am using WFW and I am GREATLY satisfied, specially that I am mobile user (GP - Domain/Standart profile, netsh configuration...)

[Zxian]

My apologies about the differences between SP1 and SP1a. I had previously read that the difference was as I had said. After reading the info from the source.

Like I said, Service Pack 2 disables a few services. I disable these and more services that I don't need anyways, so that's no change for me.

Most of the changes made in Service Pack 2 (that I can read from the article that you supplied, thank you) seem to try to secure a PC that doesn't have a third party firewall installed. For example, the RPC Interface restriction states

This key modifies the behavior of all RPC interfaces on the system and will, by default, eliminate remote anonymous access to RPC interfaces on the system.

In other words, an anonymous request would have to be made from the outside world to the computer to gain access to the RPC interface. With a properly configured firewall, this would never happen.

Windows Media Player 9 and Windows Messenger 4.7 have been available for quite some time now, so that's just a re-package of old software.

I still don't trust the new firewall that comes with Service Pack 2. Several of the MS-MVP's recommend a third party firewall since the MS firewall doesn't trace any outbound traffic.

As for the wireless "features", I honestly tried to put up with them for a good two weeks before I got fed up with everything that they did. Microsoft has seriously screwed up in that department.

And to add to everything... the fact that Service Pack 2 seems to slow everything down even more on computers that aren't top-of-the-line.

[prathapml]

This is not intended to be an insistance.... But SP2 slowing down, and all those other issues you see, only because of installing it individually. Slip-streaming and installing it, I've seen ZERO issues. Most problems that people blame on SP2 can be traced to something else. As far as compatibility is concerned, I'm yet to see any app that worked fine before SP2 and doesn't after SP2. And the combined disk/memory usage of a XPSP1+hotfixes windows, is more than an equivalent install of XPSP2.

In other words, an anonymous request would have to be made from the outside world to the computer to gain access to the RPC interface. With a properly configured firewall, this would never happen.

Right. Similarly, if you started out with a slip-streamed XPSP2 and did not install junk, you won't ever have any unnecesary outbound requests.

WMP9 and WinMesg 4.7 - the benefit is these don't need to be installed separately (therefore taking more space on HD and CD). SP2 simply has the older version replaced by this newer one. And in corporate environments, just the fact that IE6SP2 is so much better (pop-up block, sanitised ActiveX, lockdown) alone is enough to push SP2 deployment.

As for SP2+wireless... SP2 gives the best possible support EVER for wireless. And its easily manageable, with config and wizards, etc. If SP2 is not good enough for Wi-Fi, then nothing else is (excepting for 3rd party software, which can just as well be run on SP2/SP1).

Security Center? I don't ever see its face!

Simple registry key to disable it and its gone. And if windows firewall is getting trouble-some for you, you can just as well disable it.

On the whole, SP2 brings better driver and SCSI-SATA-RAID support, better security, easier usability in many areas, more control for the Administration, and so on... There's no reason for you to pass it up.

You aren't saying so in your specific case, but what really gets the goat of people who have to maintain PCs day-in and day-out, is the fact that so many of the problems that people complained about have been taken care of with SP2, and then the same people will get frightened (maybe because of unlicensed usage of XP ) and opt to not install SP2 - but still complain that XP is not good.

[Zxian]

This is not intended to be an insistance....  But SP2 slowing down, and all those other issues you see, only because of installing it individually. Slip-streaming and installing it, I've seen ZERO issues. Most problems that people blame on SP2 can be traced to something else. As far as compatibility is concerned, I'm yet to see any app that worked fine before SP2 and doesn't after SP2.

As for SP2+wireless... SP2 gives the best possible support EVER for wireless. And its easily manageable, with config and wizards, etc. If SP2 is not good enough for Wi-Fi, then nothing else is (excepting for 3rd party software, which can just as well be run on SP2/SP1).

As for the speed and compatibility, we have to remember that every computer system is different. Even two computers with the same brands and models of hardware can behave differently in certain situations. I've had problems with media software and Service Pack 2 and the latest drivers that Compaq has released for my computer. Kinda wierd... but it's fine with SP1a and the second latest drivers.

As for wireless, I was never able to get the wireless configuration utility to stop telling me that there was no network connection available when I turned off my wireless card. For a desktop computer that sits in the same spot and connects to the same network all the time, it's fine, but then again the old configuration utility was also fine for that. I personally think that the old wireless setup screens were fine for wireless. The wizard that SP2 supplies is only really meant for a static wifi network and not so much for a mobile computer. To connect to a new network, you have to run the wizard again, or enter the managment screens like you had to in SP1.

Edit: Just to add... I'm not saying that SP2 isn't good. All I'm saying is that it causes me more problems than solutions.

[Obliviator]

I think we all have some sort of problem related to the issue of hardware compatibility. Standby used to work perfectly for me until SP2.

[prathapml]

Slip-stream it into your XP source. Install.

It will work perfectly fine.

[Zxian]

I don't think that you've understood where I came from with this... I have slipstreamed SP2 onto my RTM install disc and installed (after formatting).

I still had problems with speed and certain programs.

Not all computers are alike, especially laptops... they're really fussy when it comes to drivers.