Winchat

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.messenger,microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

We need to allow two users to message internally and reasonably securely.
They are currently using IM (but not Messenger) without encryption. Short
term, it would be great to let them use %windir%\system32\WinChat.exe. But a
quick test on XP SP2 fails, and I'm not sure why. Involved test systems have
Messenger, Network DDE, and Network DDE DSDM running. What's missing?
--
Greg Stigers, MCSA
remember to vote for the answers you like

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.messenger,microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

Use Windows Messenger.

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User
Microsoft Newsgroups

Be Smart! Protect Your PC!
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/security/protect/default.mspx

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Greg Stigers, MCSA" wrote:

| We need to allow two users to message internally and reasonably securely.
| They are currently using IM (but not Messenger) without encryption. Short
| term, it would be great to let them use %windir%\system32\WinChat.exe. But a
| quick test on XP SP2 fails, and I'm not sure why. Involved test systems have
| Messenger, Network DDE, and Network DDE DSDM running. What's missing?
| --
| Greg Stigers, MCSA

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.messenger,microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

"Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com>:
> Use Windows Messenger.

Our issues with Messenger are that it is neither internal nor secure from
sniffing outside our network. We run Exchange 2003, so no Exchange IM, and
are unlikely to get Live! Communication Server any time soon. I realize that
there are products to encrypt Messenger traffic. But it then becomes hard to
convince the users in question that Messenger is "better for them" than the
IM service they are already using.

Winchat is there. There's not a lot to using it, except for our
administrative work to make it work, about which the users could care less.
I know it's not encrypted, but at least it stays local.
--
Greg Stigers, MCSA
remember to vote for the answers you like

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.messenger,microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

Not sure why WinChat would fail on your system...

As you seem more concerned about keeping traffic internal than encryption,
have you considered creating a rule that prevents outgoing traffic on the
port used by whatever chat client you go with? If nothing else, that would
keep the traffic internal and allow users to communicate on the LAN.

Of course, this assumes that your network is behind a configurable firewall,
but that seems a safe assumption.

"Greg Stigers, MCSA" <gregstigers+wmsn@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:%23%237L8PXFFHA.2176@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> "Carey Frisch [MVP]" <cnfrisch@nospamgmail.com>:
>> Use Windows Messenger.
>
> Our issues with Messenger are that it is neither internal nor secure from
> sniffing outside our network. We run Exchange 2003, so no Exchange IM, and
> are unlikely to get Live! Communication Server any time soon. I realize
> that there are products to encrypt Messenger traffic. But it then becomes
> hard to convince the users in question that Messenger is "better for them"
> than the IM service they are already using.
>
> Winchat is there. There's not a lot to using it, except for our
> administrative work to make it work, about which the users could care
> less. I know it's not encrypted, but at least it stays local.
> --
> Greg Stigers, MCSA
> remember to vote for the answers you like
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.messenger,microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

"DJ Borell" <dborell(remove)@techmedix.com> wrote:
> Not sure why WinChat would fail on your system...
Neither am I. But first try on my home network did no better. It works for
you?

> As you seem more concerned about keeping traffic internal than encryption,
> have you considered creating a rule that prevents outgoing traffic on the
> port used by whatever chat client you go with?
I want encryption, too, but that's another problem. Actually, I want
Exchange to give me IMing. But since Messenger does require either an SIP
server or Passport, and we do not have an SIP server, we are stuck going
outside. I assume that Messenger traffic also flows outside, and is not
peer-to-peer.

Again, these are two users, higher than me in the org chart, who are using a
well-known IM client for in-house conversations. We really want to keep it
in-house, and other players are looking at various freeware offerings, which
I would prefer to avoid if MS has something I can use instead.
--
Greg Stigers, MCSA
remember to vote for the answers you like

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general,microsoft.public.windowsxp.messenger,microsoft.public.windowsxp.security_admin (More info?)

"Greg Stigers, MCSA" <gregstigers+wmsn@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:ezZKpqXFFHA.1348@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

> Neither am I. But first try on my home network did no better. It works for
> you?

Well, I never use it, so I tested it after reading your post. I ran it on
my W2K3 DC and connected with my XP Pro (SP2) client. Worked without
problem. Then, just to make sure, I connected two XP Pro clients and it
worked there, too. I'm running 2K3 with ISA04 as the gateway, configured
"wide-open" for everything in the LAT.

> Again, these are two users, higher than me in the org chart, who are using
> a well-known IM client for in-house conversations. We really want to keep
> it in-house, and other players are looking at various freeware offerings,
> which I would prefer to avoid if MS has something I can use instead.

Well, I guess the org chart explains why you're doing it...as most admins
would just say "no" to this without a business need. ;-)

As far as I've ever looked, your options from MS are pretty well limited to
MSN Messenger and WinChat.

Take a look at this one. I've never used it, but have heard of it. Also,
it offers encrypted traffic. And since you only need two licenses (for
now), it's rather inexpensive.

http://messenger.softros.com/