Put it in a couberd? What do you mean hide it? do you want it all but invisable to the lan (wich can be done witha fire wall) or what?
That has hidden it to all but the least persistent person. with windows XP all you have to do is open my network places, then hit the link which says show workgroup computers, then go up one "directory" and you will see the two workgroups... To stop it showing up you should block the ports needed for file and print sharing. Rod
uc this is y i hate firewalls, this is peoples aproch, block it at the firewall. JUST DISABLE FILE SHARING. not hard, goto the adaptor properties, and uncheck fire sharing + microsoft client. done.
But if you disable file and print sharing I thought that the computer was still visable, however it just said access denied or whatever when you "opened" it. However I could and probably am wrong... Essentially this comes down to how hidden it needs to be. If it needs to be invisable then the best way is to remove the network cable Rod
A firewall can be configured to drop inbound connections, while still allowing outbound connections, so although you're "invisible" on the LAN, you can still access other people's shares. Furthermore, a firewall can be configured to stop inbound requests for any or all TCP and UDP ports, as well as other protocols (ICMP for example). Disabling F+P sharing doesn't accomplish that. This is why people suggest using a firewall. It's a more powerful and comprehensive solution for making your PC invisible across a network. Cheers Buzzy
A firewall is close as your going to get.. If you plugged a firewalled and locked down system into my network I would still be able to know its there.. Unless your not using TCP/IP, and then you wouldn't have internet acccess.. So why hide a machine on the network anywaY?
you can tell windows how to change its response to ICMP, or you could in NT 4. as for allowing outgoing, yes thats true, but you can also change its policies so that its stealthed. its just very bad practice, alough a nice quick fix, to block everything at the firewall
How would you go about "changing the policies" (what policies exactly?) on a W2k or XP desktop so that it doesn't respond to an attempted connection on a TCP port? By that, I mean that it silently drops the connection rather than sending a SYN ACK or NACK packet back in response to the initial SYN? Yes, you can set up TCP/IP filtering on a connection to block or allow only certain ports, but that's extremely limited - you don't, for example, have the option to specify "only inbound" or "only outbound", or include or exclude an IP range from the rules. I don't get why you say that dropping incoming connections at the firewall is bad practice. That's what firewalls are *for* Cheers Buzzy
Firewalls shouldn't be used to block a service, when u can disable the service, its a waste of time, and its way some nasty person will exploit ur bad security design, its just not a *good* thing. a firewall is for dropping malicous (in the idel world) packets, or implementing a VLAN type idea based on say an IP range. When you want something thats global you just stop the service. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firewall#Firewalls_in_computer_networking Its like when people have print host service running on unix, when they never use it, so they just firewall the port, its stupid.
