Gibson Research is FOS?

Is Steve Gibson creating hysteria to his benefit?

  • Yes, he's FOS

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No, he really is a security expert concerned about others.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • A little of both.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

Clocker

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
3,554
Location
USA
Steve GIbson @ www.grc.com raised a big stink about WinXP using raw sockets and it being such a big security risk. According to Steve, WinXP boxes are so insecure, home users should not be using it. We all need ZoneAlarm accoring to Steve.

However, his ShieldsUp page which uses his new 'nano-probe' technology to search for machine vulnerabilites indicates my WinXP machine it totally invisible on the 'net with the default settings on WinXPs firewall.

How is some script kiddie going to hack my machine and plant a trojan if he can't even see it? I'm starting to wonder if Steve is just FOS. He probably has a controlling interest in ZoneAlarm...

Clocker
 

Groltz

My demeaning user rank is
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Messages
1,295
Location
Pierce County, WA
Take a look at this stuff Kev. I got it from here. To find it on that page, go "FIND" and search for "shields". (It is a big page.) Then click on "dangerous misinformation."

Shields UP!
It is not the normal practice of this site to criticize other sites; however, Shields UP! is spreading a great deal of dangerous misinformation on the risks of Microsoft Networking:

Shields UP! claims that "the best FREE thing you can do for your Internet security is to immediately remove the Client for Microsoft Networks." [bold emphasis added] As explained above, the risk is from the server component of Microsoft Networking (File and Printer Sharing for Microsoft Networks), not the client component. (See Fiction/Urban Myths)
Shields UP! can report that you are "wide OPEN" even when NetBIOS is in fact secure (i.e., no "shares"), which just spreads "Internet security hysteria." (See Note below)
Worse, Shields UP! can report that you are "exposing NO SHARES to the Internet" even when you do have "shares" exposed (e.g., when "shares" are merely "hidden" with a trailing "$"). "A FALSE sense of security is worse than being unsure."
Shields UP! suggests that password crackers (based on brute force trial and error) make password protection insecure. In fact, the most common problem is no real password protection at all. If you do use passwords and avoid easily guessed words (e.g., "password"), then it's very doubtful that anyone will invest the time and effort needed to crack your password. (See Note below)
Shields UP! claims that "personal" firewalls are the "ONLY WAY to be safe!" Although personal firewalls can provide good protection for personal Internet access, they are not as safe as separate standalone (hardware) firewalls. (For more information, see "Hardware Firewalls" in the main Navas Cable Modem/DSL Tuning GuideTM.)
The false claim that so-called "Evil Port Monitors" (certain unnamed security products) are "so much junk" that compromise your computer's security by "actively advertising its existence across the Internet" is simply "Internet security hysteria" promulgated by Shields UP!. Port monitors don't really do that. (See Fiction/Urban Myths)
The claim that your computer and workgroup names are in and of themselves "significant personal information" that is "highly valuable" is likewise just "Internet security hysteria" promulgated by Shields UP!. (See Fiction/Urban Myths)
Shields UP! claims that Client for Microsoft Networks will "slow down" your computer. The real impact on your computer is insignificant. (See Fiction/Urban Myths)
The strong password example at Shields UP! ("4F3hw9Egh84d2") uses mixed case. While that is helpful on some other systems, NetBIOS passwords are not case sensitive, so mixing case does not increase NetBIOS password security.
Shields UP! is unable to distinguish a weak (insecure) Scope ID from a strong (secure) one -- it will indicate that you are secure either way.
For alternatives to Shields UP!, see "Check Your Security" in the main Navas Cable Modem/DSL Tuning Guide.

Notes:

You will pass Shields UP! "Test My Shields" if you set a (strong) Scope ID, or if you completely disable NetBIOS over TCP/IP.
Even assuming 100 trials per second, and that an attacker would know what kind of attack to use, cracking a simple two-word password (e.g., "rocktowel") with a minimal (64K) dictionary-based approach would take on the order of a year or more of continuous non-stop attack (probably much more). Long before then the attacker will almost certainly give up and move on, because there are easier and more productive fish to fry.
Steve Gibson (self-proclaimed security guru behind Shields UP!) is also spreading a great deal of hysteria over raw socket functionality in Microsoft Windows XP. For rebuttal to this hysteria, see:
"Security geek developing WinXP raw socket exploit" (The Register)
"Microsoft rebuts XP Net instability claims" (The Register)
"Hostile Code, not the Windows XP Socket Implementation, is the Real Security Threat" (Microsoft)
"Steve Gibson really is off his rocker" (The Register)
"Code Red Tribulation is nigh, Steve Gibson warns" (The Register)
"To put it simply: 'no'" (Vmyths.com)
See also:
"Unmasking Steve Gibson" (radsoft.net)
The Steve Gibson Saga (Vmyths.com)
Shields UP! is not the only case of hysteria from Steve Gibson. He got his start by promulgating the myth that "hard disks die" due to degradation of magnetic patterns. He profited from the myth by selling SpinRite, a program claimed to fix the alleged problem. (more details)
("Shields UP!" is a claimed trademark of Gibson Research Corporation.)



--Steve
 

flagreen

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
1,529
Guys, here are the results I got -

onelook.jpg



twolook.jpg


What does this mean beyond that which it seems to state - I don't have anything to worry about?
 

Prof.Wizard

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Jan 26, 2002
Messages
1,460
I have only the UPnP port open... all others are stealth!

But I don't care about that port anyway... 8)
 

Prof.Wizard

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Jan 26, 2002
Messages
1,460
flagreen said:
I just wonder how trust worthy the test is though.

Well, consider we've never seen a serious bashing of Gibson on sites such as the Registry or the Inquirer... :eekers:
 

flagreen

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
1,529
I guess it is fairly accurate. I also ran the free test from ScannerX and came up with Zero risk with a Security warning of 1.0. I have no idea what the 1.0 warning is but compared to the examples they list on their site it's pretty low. It could be the 1.0 is a result of their having been able to trace my IP address?
 

HellDiver

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Jan 22, 2002
Messages
130
I actually believe Steve serves a good purpose in today's IT "society". He's the guy to discover vulnerabilities and to scream his head off that they exist. Just how much he exaggerates is irrelevant to me - as long as it catches the eye of those who should be fixing things... And several of his efforts (e.g. the adware/spyware call) did quite a lot of good. I think there is a real need for this kind of watchdog today - someone both looking for monkey businesses going on (something that haxors and other nice individuals from New Order and such do as well), and someone who can make people's heads turn (something that folks from New Order and such don't always want to do, and usually can't do either).
 
Top