DSL - less secure than dial-up?

[genrex]

I'm thinking of getting DSL, mainly because my dial-up takes an hour to download a 4-minute track video. I assume DSL will reduce the download time considerably.

But I don't know much about DSL. Is my internet connection required to be "on" all the time? Are there additional security risks to DSL, compared to dial-up?

I'm running Windows XP with a little security: McAfee antivirus, Windows Defender, Windows Firewall, and Webroot Spy Sweeper. I run complete system sweeps once a week. Will this be adequate if I get DSL?

Roger

[slodave]

Dial-up is more secure, but DSL is much better and please go for it. From what you state, you should be ok. You want to make sure that your computer has an I.P. address like 192.168.x.x if you use DSL. You can always turn off or unplug the DSL modem when not using it.

[fastpat]

I use a current production Linksys WRT54GX wireless/wired router for my home system which is connected via DSL. It's easy to set up and use, and has built-in firewall protection.

[masraum]

I wouldn't worry too much. Yes, cable modem and DSL customers are targetted a bit more than dial-up because they have more bandwidth that can be used by deliquents, but with a little bit of security and forethought (like you've exhibited) you should be fine.

I've been on DSL for about 6 or 7 years now and have not had any problems. For many years, I didn't even have virus or firewall protection. I just had the settings of my email and browser adjusted for security and used my head.

[widebody911]

Technically, a dial-up or DSL connection would be equally exposed, but the dial-up is so slow that it would take forever for them to exploit it.

My SBC/AT&T DSL is so unreliable that my connection would be safe without a firewall - you can't root what ain't on

I read somewhere that the life expectancy of a virgin, unprotected Windows box on the 'net was somewhere around 15 minutes. If you're bored some time, set up a clean box w/o protection and install a sniffer like Ethereal on it, and watch what happens - a real eye opener.

[competentone]

Originally posted by widebody911
I read somewhere that the life expectancy of a virgin, unprotected Windows box on the 'net was somewhere around 15 minutes. If you're bored some time, set up a clean box w/o protection and install a sniffer like Ethereal on it, and watch what happens - a real eye opener.

I think it's shorter than 15 minutes!

We have cable and run a Norton Firewall; you can set the firewall to be notified of the attacks if you want -- of course you'll just be closing the warning boxes non-stop if you do that. The attacks come litterally every few seconds!

We had to do some re-installations and had to have the firewall down for just a few minutes before re-installing all the XP updates and were infected with something in those few minutes. We (actually "my wife" since this is her baby -- my computer is my old Mac running OS 8.6!) had to start from scratch and re-install everything!

I don't know how anyone can be on a high-speed connection and not be running a firewall -- unless there are differences in ISPs. Do some protect their users better than others? (We have Earthlink, but the service is delivered by Time-Warner.)

Of course if you're running a Mac, you're probably pretty safe -- especially if you're using a vintage OS like me with my 8.6! (I'm actually rarely on that computer, but it still works OK when I use it.)

The Pelican Boards here are not designed for dial-up -- I've tried it, but always run out of patience.

[VincentVega]

Zone Alarm Pro, Consumer Reports Best Buy

[masraum]

Originally posted by competentone
I don't know how anyone can be on a high-speed connection and not be running a firewall -- unless there are differences in ISPs. Do some protect their users better than others? (We have Earthlink, but the service is delivered by Time-Warner.)

For a long time I made sure that the standard XP firewall was on and had all "extra" windows services disabled. I also rarely use MSIE. I've been using Netscape/Firefox for years. At some point I installed a stand alone firewall on XP. I tried Zonealarm. I'm sure it's a good firewall, but I hated it. I ended up going with Sygate Personal firewall. It's much more configurable which is good for me since I'm a network engineer during the day. I didn't get a firewall device until I got wireless and even now, I have the IP of my home box set as a DMZ device which means it's not protected except by the NAT which is not really a security measure.

[fastpat]

Originally posted by widebody911
I read somewhere that the life expectancy of a virgin, unprotected Windows box on the 'net was somewhere around 15 minutes. If you're bored some time, set up a clean box w/o protection and install a sniffer like Ethereal on it, and watch what happens - a real eye opener.

Much shorter. A friend who works at one of the larger electronics companies told me that they were forced to have their firewall software installed and up and running BEFORE connecting to an internet source. Even though they had multiple T1 lines, if they connected an unprotected Windows machine to the internet, it would have a virus installed within seconds of connection, without sending or receiving a single packet.

[widebody911]

Originally posted by fastpat
if they connected an unprotected Windows machine to the internet, it would have a virus installed within seconds of connection, without sending or receiving a single packet.

Unless the virus was part of your standard s/w load, it would have to recieve at least a few packets in order to be compromised

[masraum]

I've heard that Windows can/will get hit faster than it can download the latest updates. That's not surprising, but that would still be a few minutes. Remember fellas, it's a crap shoot. It could be seconds or hours, but it may average out to minutes.

[dhoward]

Not all firewall activity is an 'attack'.
A PC getting a 'virus' in 2 minutes by exposing it to the internet?
Hardly likely at home. Maybe if you hung it off of a DoD net...