Why would I want a firewall to ALWAYS trust a new network?

[Phil]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Please read the post copied below for background,

Quote "you have to set the rules for zonealarm to always
trust a new network."

Why would I want ZA to ALWAYS trust a new network? Where
does this new network come from anyway?
Phil

>-----Original Message-----
>Phil:
>Nope.
>Check the documentation in Zone Alarm, or ZA website for
>steps to fix this.
>-> you have to set the rules for zonealarm to always
>trust a new network.
>A notification in ZA is not an XP "glitch", if anything,
>it is a ZA "glitch",this is extremely common in ZA, if
>the rule is not set.
>
>Dave
>
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>Windows XP and Zone Alarm both detect new network but I
>>haven't installed a new network device. Yesterday ZA
>>asked me to name the network (strange IP address)- I
>>named it "Possible Spy". Later I noticed that it
>>disappeared from the ZA zones list. Is this some kind
>of
>>hacker activity, family members mischief, or Windows XP
>>glitch?
>>
>>TIA,
>>
>>Phil
>>
>>.
>>
>.
>
..

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Phil wrote:

> Please read the post copied below for background,
>
> Quote "you have to set the rules for zonealarm to always
> trust a new network."
>
> Why would I want ZA to ALWAYS trust a new network? Where
> does this new network come from anyway?
> Phil
>

The quote and reply might be over-stated. Setting ZoneAlarm's
"zones" has always been optional. Use the "trusted" setting
to allow access from and access to known (and, therefore,
trusted) sites, and not necessarily "new" network. The network
can be any network with a static IP address (and subnet mask).
All this does to grant transparency between known, good links
to the otherwise firewall-protected computer.

 

[Phil]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Thanks for clearing that up for me Ghostrider. Now, in
the past year, I have never seen that message. Why do you
think a new network was detected twice this week and never
before? Also why would the IP address disappear from the
Zone Alarm "Zones" page after I selected "Do Not Trust"
and named it "Possible Spy"

thanks Again,
Phil

>-----Original Message-----
>
>Phil wrote:
>
>> Please read the post copied below for background,
>>
>> Quote "you have to set the rules for zone alarm to
always
>> trust a new network."
>>
>> Why would I want ZA to ALWAYS trust a new network?
Where
>> does this new network come from anyway?
>> Phil
>>
>
>The quote and reply might be over-stated. Setting Neala's
>"zones" has always been optional. Use the "trusted"
setting
>to allow access from and access to known (and, therefore,
>trusted) sites, and not necessarily "new" network. The
network
>can be any network with a static IP address (and subnet
mask).
>All this does to grant transparency between known, good
links
>to the otherwise firewall-protected computer.
>
>
>.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Phil wrote:
> Thanks for clearing that up for me Ghostrider. Now, in
> the past year, I have never seen that message. Why do you
> think a new network was detected twice this week and never
> before? Also why would the IP address disappear from the
> Zone Alarm "Zones" page after I selected "Do Not Trust"
> and named it "Possible Spy"
>
> thanks Again,
> Phil
>

<<snipped>>

Sorry but have not gotten into this particular situation
with ZoneAlarm. Perhaps I am pro-active in setting up my
trusted zones. Or I ignore attempts by outside systems or
nets to gain access on a permanent basis. Note that there
are certain applications that trigger this type of activity,
even legitimate ones, and sometimes under the disguise of
having to honor a warranty of some type or the other, e.g.,
automatic update checking, and so on.

 

[Phil]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

I guess I can look to see if some new software is causing
the problem.
Thanks Again.
Phil
>-----Original Message-----
>
>Phil wrote:
>> Thanks for clearing that up for me Ghostrider. Now, in
>> the past year, I have never seen that message. Why do
you
>> think a new network was detected twice this week and
never
>> before? Also why would the IP address disappear from
the
>> Zone Alarm "Zones" page after I selected "Do Not Trust"
>> and named it "Possible Spy"
>>
>> thanks Again,
>> Phil
>>
>
><<snipped>>
>
>Sorry but have not gotten into this particular situation
>with ZoneAlarm. Perhaps I am pro-active in setting up my
>trusted zones. Or I ignore attempts by outside systems or
>nets to gain access on a permanent basis. Note that there
>are certain applications that trigger this type of
activity,
>even legitimate ones, and sometimes under the disguise of
>having to honor a warranty of some type or the other,
e.g.,
>automatic update checking, and so on.
>
>.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

You can also try a different FireWall if you like. I highly recommend
Sygate Personal Firewall (Free). You can try that out here:
http://smb.sygate.com/products/spf_standard.htm

----
Nathan McNulty


Phil wrote:
> I guess I can look to see if some new software is causing
> the problem.
> Thanks Again.
> Phil
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>
>>Phil wrote:
>>
>>>Thanks for clearing that up for me Ghostrider. Now, in
>>>the past year, I have never seen that message. Why do
>
> you
>
>>>think a new network was detected twice this week and
>
> never
>
>>>before? Also why would the IP address disappear from
>
> the
>
>>>Zone Alarm "Zones" page after I selected "Do Not Trust"
>>>and named it "Possible Spy"
>>>
>>>thanks Again,
>>>Phil
>>>
>>
>><<snipped>>
>>
>>Sorry but have not gotten into this particular situation
>>with ZoneAlarm. Perhaps I am pro-active in setting up my
>>trusted zones. Or I ignore attempts by outside systems or
>>nets to gain access on a permanent basis. Note that there
>>are certain applications that trigger this type of
>
> activity,
>
>>even legitimate ones, and sometimes under the disguise of
>>having to honor a warranty of some type or the other,
>
> e.g.,
>
>>automatic update checking, and so on.
>>
>>.
>>