probably another 1802 thread

[Blondeagle]

I have XP
Run a off a wireless server linksys
PC flank says it's stealthed.
I have gone to windows firewall(as far as i know my only firewall I have) and said to allow 1802 and 1803.
the IP address the game takes is different from the one pc flank is testing.

I have no idea how to open port 1802 and the internet seems insufficient to help.

[Blondeagle]

ok, I've been reading through the various threads before and after i posted this. Most of them seem to be full of half the information i need or be just enough over my head i can't connect the dots. Can someone just either tell me what i need to do or what information i need to supply to figure this out?

[EugeneZ]

All linksys routers (what's a linksys server?) have firewalls. In fact, if you are always behind a linksys firewall, I recommend you turn off your windows firewall (you can tell Windows to shut up about it by telling it you are usinga thirt-party firewall, which is true).

To give you a perfect guide, I'd need to know your model number. However, the basic idea is the same: Go to your router's config page by typing into your browser:

https://192.168.1.1

The username should be blank and the password is most likely 'admin' without the quotes. If that doesn't work, look on linksys's website for your router documentation. Once you're in, find a tab called "Applications & Gaming." It may also be called Port Forwarding or NAT. You should see a grid of sorts with columns like "Application", "Port", "Protocol", "IP", and "Enabled".

You can put any description you want in "Application." For example, "Fantasy Grounds."

In port obviously put 1802. If it allows a range put 1802 again.

For protocol, select TCP, if applicable, though to be safe you can also say both. (I always do.)

The IP address part is the hardest. DON'T use your external IP. Instead, you need to figure out what IP address your computer has. If it's dynamically assigned (default), then if you ever need to reconnect to your router, your IP may change and you will need to change the value here. If you want, look up an article on configuring a static IP on your router so that it always stays the same. For the time being, just hit Start > Run and type 'cmd'. Type 'ipconfig' and hit Enter. Several entries may come up, but hopefully it's just one. In any case, under one of the entries should be a label "IP Address" besides which you should see a number like "192.168.1.xxx" where xxx is a number between 2 and 255. Mine is 192.168.1.200. This is the IP address your router gave your machine. Type that into the IP box in the port forwarding screen.

Make sure the enabled checkbox is ticked and hit SAVE on the bottom of the screen. You should be all set.

[Blondeagle]

thank you so much for your help so far
under Applications & Gaming the columns I'm getting are
Application Start End Protocol IP Address Enable

star and end seem to be numerical values, do i put 1802 into them? I take it the range is the ports that I want to keep open.

protocol through enable make enough sense though.

[Foen]

Start and End are the range of ports you want to enable, in this case 1802 should go as both the start and end port number.

Foen

[Griogre]

I'd also discourage you from cutting off the Windows Firewall. Just approve FG for it. A hardware firewall (on your router) and a software one (like the Windows one) are one of the best combinations for security. This is because typically hardware firewalls allow certain ports to always be open - this is a straight hole in your firewall. Software firewalls on the other hand tend to open ports by *application* IE they only open a port for a running program (some software firewalls are different).

Over time your hardware firewall tends to have more and more ports open so this firewall looks like swiss cheese. A software firewall will keep the open ports on your hardware firewall secure when you are not running the application that needs the ports open. This is usually exactly what you want.

[EugeneZ]

I respectfully disagree. Most hardware firewalls (for example, ones in Linksys routers) have all inbound ports closed. A hardware firewall is more effective than a software firewall, especially for less knowledgable users, for several reasons. Reasons being that the security is the same throughout the network, remains the same throughout operating system changes, upgrades, etc.. And can't be turned off by malware (the Windows Firewall is a common target of malware). You should rely on your Linksys firewall as a single point of entrance into your network to avoid confusion. Confusion leads to mistakes, and mistakes can lead to an insecure network.

While I agree with your last point about a software firewall being able to ensure the correct software is on the recieving end of an open port, if you are dealing with a scenario where this would be an advantage, you should probably not be using Windows Firewall anyway. In 99% of cases, running two firewalls will only lead to less security via confusion.

[Blondeagle]

Thanks everyone for the help. you're awesome.

[Griogre]

I respectfully disagree. Most hardware firewalls (for example, ones in Linksys routers) have all inbound ports closed. A hardware firewall is more effective than a software firewall, especially for less knowledgable users, for several reasons. Reasons being that the security is the same throughout the network, remains the same throughout operating system changes, upgrades, etc.. And can't be turned off by malware (the Windows Firewall is a common target of malware). You should rely on your Linksys firewall as a single point of entrance into your network to avoid confusion. Confusion leads to mistakes, and mistakes can lead to an insecure network.

While I agree with your last point about a software firewall being able to ensure the correct software is on the recieving end of an open port, if you are dealing with a scenario where this would be an advantage, you should probably not be using Windows Firewall anyway. In 99% of cases, running two firewalls will only lead to less security via confusion.
While I agree with most of your points, I respectfully disagree with you conclusion that one hardware firewall is a best practices position – even for a home user. I believe the “cost” of running a software firewall along with a hardware firewall is very low effort wise and potentially can save the user a great deal of pain from both a security and frustration point of view.

First, I totally agree you should only run one software firewall. Running more than one is just going to cause trouble. However running a firmware/hardware firewall and a software firewall should not cause any problems in the normal home use (or business) environment.

Second, while your points are all valid on confusion - that argument would seem to apply more to a business environment rather than a home user who probably has no more than a few computers and most likely doesn't even have a true local LAN. In this case every computer is an island that happens to have a common internet connection and should each be secured individually. Most security software these days assumes the users don’t know what they are doing and/or malware is trying to shut it down.

Third, I take issue with your assertion a hardware firewall is more effective than a software one. They are *different* and have different strengths and weaknesses. A hardware firewall is very good at stopping connections. If you don’t come in on an open port on a hardware firewall you won’t connect. Thus I would agree that a hardware firewall is better than a software one when it comes to denial. What I don’t like about a hardware firewall is they usually aren’t very “smart” when it comes to accepting connections on an open port.

The whole point of the original poster is he trying to setup a FG server which requires his firewalls to allow and accept inbound connections. You mentioned yourself software firewalls do better at selectively allowing inbound and outbound connections. You don’t seem think this is worth while if all you have is the Windows Firewall. I disagree here. I am not going to say the Windows Firewall is a great firewall, however these days, even the Windows Firewall *can* monitor and stop outbound traffic (though it took Microsoft couple of service packs). If the user makes the effort to manually configure the firewall when he is asked whether the program should be allowed to make connections then the firewall is decent.

Finally, cutting off almost every modern software firewall usually has absolutely no effect on opening, closing or sheathing of the ports by that firewall – which I believe is the most common reason most users cut off a software firewall. When the firewall is shut down it almost never changes these settings all it does is stop application monitoring, probably the best security feature of a software firewall. Because of the problem of malware cutting off firewalls many of them will “spontaneously” cut themselves back on after a bit. Many casual users are not aware of these properties, and I believe it is best to encourage them to work with their computer’s firewall instead of trying to fight it – because I believe it will cause them less frustration in the long run and has the added bonus of giving them better security. That’s my reasoning behind thinking you should have both an active hardware and software firewall.

[Dachannien]

Running a software firewall is still a good idea, because sometimes you will run across programs that, while not overtly malware, still perform nefarious acts (e.g., phoning home for advertising, etc.).

[EugeneZ]

I think ultimately we have different ways of looking at it. You didn't state anything I disagree with and it sounds like the opposite is more or less true on the specifics as well. We just disagree on how much damage a user can do given a software firewall to control. You seems to feel they can do more good than harm. I feel that users who don't know what they're doing with a piece of security software are apt to ruin their setup in some way, or trust it in situations where they shouldn't. I like hardware firewalls BECAUSE they don't have the featureset of software firewalls. They are simple. Port is either open or its closed, end of story.

I think it's probably up to whoevers reading this to decide for themselves which approach they will take. I honestly don't think enough of the issue to continue it beyond this point. Just thought I'd share my thoughts.