|
The biggest thing I am trying to accomplish is to monitor & police all of the internet traffic that comes through my house: 1) I want to know all the web sites being accessed 2) I want to be able to restrict access to certain named web sites 3) I want to be able to restrict access to other web sites based on content (but with the ability to override, as necessary, by my or my wife's permission) With the Gigafast router, I am extremely limited on the first two, and have no capability on the last one. I am guessing that IPCop handles the first two, and that a plug-in (Dan's Guardian???) handles the third. The only problem with using ZoneAlarm is that it noticeably sucks up resources on my vastly underpowered PC. Also, it caused my Win95 setup to freeze when I tried it a few years ago; since then, I upgraded to Win98SE and increased RAM to 128MB (from 64MB) on a 233MHz box. So, maybe I'll give it another go. With all the problems associated with wireless, and the expert attention required to secure it and make it workable, I'll try the powerline network before I bother with wireless. We don't have laptops and, if that day comes, we have plenty of outlets in our house. Thanks again for your responses, Bob! db > -----Original Message----- > From: pctech-bounces.com@xxxxxxxxxxxx / Bob Crothers > Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2004 9:31 AM > > Dan, > > 1) Yes. Firewall software and your "firmware" are the same thing in this > case. If your only need is NAT (Network Address Translation or > what you are > calling IP address translation) then perhaps you don't need IP Cop. > > I use IP Cop at home because I like it. And I use it at work > because it is > very effective. So my home environment was "free". A > router/firewall would have cost me money. > > IP Cop is also only concerned with inbound traffic. If this is a > concern of > yours, then use something like Zone Alarm on the PC's and keep them behind > your firewall of choice (Eg: IPCop or your router/firewall). > > 2) Just upgraded to Win98? I'd still bet there is a wireless network in > your future...but probably a more distant future than many! <g> > > 3) re the "router part of the hardware". Actually, IP Cop performs that > also. But as I said above, perhaps IP Cop is an added layer of complexity > you don't really need. > > Bob
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.