| reply to karlmarx
Re: Peer Guardian said by karlmarx:No, but some protection is always better than no protection. Depends on how you define "better". You can block a significant portion of the internet and still be very open to attack. It is only that you don't know whether all those other millions of IPs you've allowed are trustworthy or not, and trust them by default anyway. That's still pretty weak security.
said by karlmarx:Sure, they can use new, unknown IP addresses, The big problem.
said by karlmarx:so you are a fool if you don't at least block KNOWN ones. You'd be a fool to think that would be be good enough for any considerable level of security.
said by karlmarx:I use peer guardian, of course. But when I'm using torrents, it's only VERY rarely do I ever see a mediadefender.org. And the reason for that is that is that I use private torrent sites, and as soon as ANY IP from the 'known ranges' is found by the tracker, the client is automatically kicked and banned. Hmm. I guess they will just have to try another line, or a proxy... (remember, you are basing your security on this).
said by karlmarx:So some protection is better than no protection. But not significantly...
said by karlmarx:It's like sex, the only way to be SURE you don't catch a STD, is to not have sex, but that's not realistic, so always use a condom. I'd imagine that a condom is more effective than an IP blacklist at keeping you safe (just an opinion, though). |
