How healthy is your internet security?

[mekelek]

both Kaspersky's and Emsisoft's firewall failed that botnet test, so it's clearly not that. i'm sure what @Umbra is saying is true, it's just checking for open ports.

 

[Sunshine-boy]

oth Kaspersky's and Emsisoft's firewall

I guess MR.Frog using Emsisoft.

 

[jamescv7]

I got an F rating but of course with different justification.

My setup is only Windows Defender and Adguard Origin but how I managed to steer away on possible attacks? Simply through browsing habits, you can survive within long term especially if your work goes on cycle like programming only.

On the other hand, it's important to check the ratings regularly if located like within enterprise so to ensure the corrective measures against attacks.

 

[AtlBo]

Thinking it's a load of crap in some areas - one of the tests was where it downloads an exe file from a 'reputable site' - I have VS and VS did absolutely nothing!

@frogboy being in AUS I wonder if they are practicing strict dns ip filtering and maybe a little packet filtering on the side too... I guess at least part of the answer could be in here somewhere:

Internet censorship in Australia - Wikipedia

Seems clear they are doing something in AUS more than at least here in the US.

 

[frogboy]

I guess MR.Frog using Emsisoft.

Yes the frog is using EIS.

 

[frogboy]

@frogboy being in AUS I wonder if they are practicing strict dns ip filtering and maybe a little packet filtering on the side too... I guess at least part of the answer could be in here somewhere:

Internet censorship in Australia - Wikipedia

Seems clear they are doing something in AUS more than at least here in the US.

It could be something like that. I am just not sure why I did so well in the test.

 

[ElectricSheep]

It could be something like that. I am just not sure why I did so well in the test.

You're a frog that's why!! There's something in the water in that pond of yours and it ain't bourbon...

 

[frogboy]

You're a frog that's why!! There's something in the water in that pond of yours and it ain't bourbon...

There is absolutely no water in my Bourbon glasses and bottle in the freezer no water no ice.

 

[uninfected1]

I got an F rating but of course with different justification.
.

I wouldn't worry about the F. We're in good company here. F is clearly the new A

 

[AtlBo]

Yes the frog is using EIS.

Dont think EIS is doing the work. Just checked on W10 system with EIS, and it got a C. Beginning to suspect more this has to do with packet/IP/domain filtering. Good test for machines on a corporate network. Good information to know I guess for everyone else.

 

[Andytay70]

omfg, what are those ports?can you tell me? or find? Wanna close them maunully.
Now who's paranoid

 

[Deletedmessiah]

This thread has been quite entertaining I must say.

 

[Deletedmessiah]

I wouldn't worry about the F. We're in good company here. F is clearly the new A

F stands for Fantastic I might add.

 

[Vasudev]

I got A. Some disadvantages though:

• Website is not encrypted and more suspectible to MITM if someone gains access
• Since I use Windows firewall, firefox or other web browsers require full access to both incoming and outgoing traffic, @Umbra any advice to configure ff or edge like that.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

I got A. It seems ublock with some filters blocked everything, avira didn't even have to do the job
only these failed:

Fail. You can access websites in countries that are embargoed by the United States and the European Union, such as North Korea. This test usually fails because your security infrastructure cannot block Internet connections by geography.
Fail. Your current system allows the outbound transmission of sensitive data such as credit card numbers. It should both detect and block this type of data loss. Many security and compliance systems are deployed in Tap mode and detect, but do not block, the leakage of sensitive information outside of your organization.
Fail. Your current system allows the outbound transmission of sensitive data such as US Social Security numbers. It should both detect and block this type of data loss. Many security and compliance systems are deployed in Tap mode and detect, but do not block, the leakage of sensitive information outside of your organization.
Fail. Your current system allows the outbound transmission of sensitive data such as software code. It should both detect and block this type of data loss. Many security and compliance systems are deployed in Tap mode and detect, but do not block, the leakage of sensitive information outside of your organization.

 

[brod56]

View attachment 158985

I got A. It seems ublock with some filters blocked everything, avira didn't even have to do the job
only these failed:

uBlock seems to have absolutely no influence here for me, got the same result with it enabled (defalut), enabled (tweaked) and disabled.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

uBlock seems to have absolutely no influence here for me, got the same result with it enabled (defalut), enabled (tweaked) and disabled.

nope, the difference is from the filters we added
I added several filters and when I checked the log of uBO, I saw a lot of blocked entries (uBO said these were blocked by my custom filters)

 

[RoboMan]

So, according to the test i'm vulnerable because my security wouldn't block porn sites. I don't see how that may affect me hehe...

 

[Sunshine-boy]

nope, the difference is from the filters we added

botnet test and others don't affect with adblocker.

 

[Evjl's Rain]

botnet test and others don't affect with adblocker.

figure it out. because my uBO blocked this website, if you allow it, you will fail against botnet but if you block it, you will pass

Spoiler: botnet

http://d36vlfy0df5iql.cloudfront.net/dlp.php?_sm_au_c=iaV161SpvWV2Nq5s0c&PHPSESSID=n45eqdvc0430ej0kipkb5oah75&cook=AWSELB=F93BE3F70A389AC4FB0356D0B711E7CFFBB62547362602D7ED9FA643B7245262559673DD3F329AF471FB3C05CE31F274512D4EC96E658DFD80F935B35E1E3A06D5FCFBC33C;%20PHPSESSID=0gk50hl5cjqgsjcrp02nre4jo6&_=1499451124495