 jvmorrisI Am The Man Who Was Not There.Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA | reply to joelmilleris
Re: Norton Internet Security 2003 Not Allowing Email Joel,
Joining with the others, nice to have you here. Now down to business.
First, check your settings in NIS 2003 by opening the NIS Console. Confirm that Security is set to HIGH and that Reporting is set to MINIMAL (or whatever it's called in NIS 2003, which I don't have, since I stopped at NIS 2002). The higher Reporting Level settings simply clutter up your logs and make it more difficult to localize a problem.
Second, now, still in the NIS console, go down to Internet Access Control (or whatever it's called today) and remove any (and all) existing rules for Outlook. IIRC, Office10 would refer to what I would call Outlook 2002. Now, try to run Outlook and connect to the Internet to check your e-mail (what you've done above won't change any of your Outlook settings, only your firewall settings). At this point, the NIS/NPF Rules Assistant should pop up and ask you if you want to • PERMIT Internet access for this application, • BLOCK Internet access for this application, • CREATE a rule for this application, or • allow NIS to automatically GENERATE a set of rules for this application. Now, I'm not sure of the order in which you will see these options or their specific wording (especially in NIS/NPF 2003), but what you want is the 'automatically GENERATE' option. By rights, that should solve your problem -- unless you've got something trying to masquerade as Outlook, which really is (probably) a rather unlikely situation.
Try this, if it works, good. If it doesn't, come back and we'll go into more details.
--
Regards, Joseph V. Morris |
|
| Thanks JVMORRIS- I tried as you asked. After deleting rules and reopening Outlook, it still wont send mail. I did check the reports and noticed on the log that
"Details: A rule for "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office10\OUTLOOK.EXE" was automatically created using a pre-configured rule"
So it reestablished the rule for Outlook but still not allowing email to be sent.
Oh and here is a kicker... when I go into settings of the email account in Outlook and do an Outlook test, it send the test email fine. !!! |
|
|
|
| I THINK I FOUND THE ANSWER!!!
I went into Internet Security Options, Firewall, HTTP Port List, then removed ports 110 & 25 from the list. (the ones Outlook commonly uses for POP3 and SMTP ports. It let me send immediatly. I will let you know if it was a fluk or continues to work. THanks for all your help.
Joel |
|
jvmorrisI Am The Man Who Was Not There.Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA | quote:
. . . . I went into Internet Security Options, Firewall, HTTP Port List, then removed ports 110 & 25 from the list. (the ones Outlook commonly uses for POP3 and SMTP ports. It let me send immediatly. . . . .
Joel,
Hmm, that is interesting! I wonder how long they've been there? I just checked the HTTP Port List on both my NIS 3 and NIS 4 firewalls, and neither 110 nor 25 is incorporated into either. Maybe Randy, or Jazzman, or CrazyM could check their setups to see is this is some sort of new default setting in NIS/NPF 2003?
For those who may be wondering what this list is: (Quoting from the Help File in NIS 3.0): quote:
HTTP Port List. The HTTP Port List shows the HTTP port numbers being filtered for Java and ActiveX blocking, script blocking, confidential information and so on. The default list contains the standard HTTP ports, but you can add ports if you use applications that perform HTTP communication through nonstandard ports. For example, your COMPUTER may connect to the Internet through a proxy server that causes all HTTP communication to go through the port used by the proxy server. Web applications that use ports not covered in this list are not filtered for content blocking.
Good catch, Joel.
--
Regards, Joseph V. Morris |
|
| said by jvmorris:
I wonder how long they've been there? I just checked the HTTP Port List on both my NIS 3 and NIS 4 firewalls, and neither 110 nor 25 is incorporated into either. Maybe Randy, or Jazzman, or CrazyM could check their setups to see is this is some sort of new default setting in NIS/NPF 2003?
Well, they aren't on MY list, and I haven't changed anything on this list since installing NIS 2003 last Saturday (6 days ago)...hmmm...  :) |
|
jvmorrisI Am The Man Who Was Not There.Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA | Randy,
What's on the e-mail tab? Maybe there's something there which has the inadvertent consequence of doing this?
--
Regards, Joseph V. Morris |
|
| answer your question, jv? :) |
|
jvmorrisI Am The Man Who Was Not There.Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA | said by Randy Bell:
answer your question, jv? :)
Yep, guess that ain't it.
--
Regards, Joseph V. Morris |
|
 EmilioGWhats This?Premium
join:2000-09-19
New York, NY | reply to Randy Bell
I was having the same problem with OE6sp1 and I simply added hotmail.com and oe.hotmail.com to the Web Content Add Sites list in NIS'2003' Options-Web Content, then set up permissions accordingly. Hth. Check your Log and check whats being blocked. |
|
jvmorrisI Am The Man Who Was Not There.Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA | Emilio,
My man! You're back!! Nice to see you posting again. (This is the right Emilio, isn't it?)
--
Regards, Joseph V. Morris |
|
 CrazyMPremium
join:2001-05-16
BC Canada
| reply to jvmorris
said by jvmorris:
Hmm, that is interesting! I wonder how long they've been there? I just checked the HTTP Port List on both my NIS 3 and NIS 4 firewalls, and neither 110 nor 25 is incorporated into either. Maybe Randy, or Jazzman, or CrazyM could check their setups to see is this is some sort of new default setting in NIS/NPF 2003?
I have never seen those ports in the HTTP Port List by default.
The default rules for the transparent proxy server, which includes the ports from the HTTP Ports List, also do not include ports 25 and 110.
It has been awhile since I tinkered with the list, but if I recall correctly any changes made there are not automatically reflected in the rule set.
If Joel added these ports himself to the HTTP Ports List directing them to the transparent proxy server, the default rules would not have allowed the email traffic.
CrazyM
[text was edited by author 2002-11-21 14:48:47] |
|
 jaykaykay4 Ever YoungPremium,MVM
join:2000-04-13
Scottsdale, AZ
kudos:19
 ·Speakeasy
| reply to EmilioG
Re: EmilioG I have nothing to add to this thread re: the issue. I do have to say Welcome back, emilioG!!! I just did a double take when I saw your name. How good to see you again. I do hope all is back to normal and we will see more of you, just as we used to. You have been missed.
--
JKKAge is a very high price to pay for my maturity. If I can't stay young, I can at least stay immature! |
|
 dpPremium,MVM
join:2000-12-08
Greensburg, PA
kudos:7 | said by jaykaykay:
I have nothing to add to this thread re: the issue. I do have to say Welcome back, emilioG!!! I just did a double take when I saw your name. How good to see you again. I do hope all is back to normal and we will see more of you, just as we used to. You have been missed.
I'll echo jkk's post. It's good to see your familiar moniker back on the boards. Hope all is well with you and hope to see more of your posts in the coming days. Welcome back friend!
--
Write your questions down on the back of a $20 dollar bill and send them to me |
|
jvmorrisI Am The Man Who Was Not There.Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA | reply to joelmilleris
It's happened again! Joel,
Other postings are now starting to show up with the same problem -- and the same solution.
See the comp.security.firewalls thread entitled "Microsoft Outlook XP and Norton's Personal Firewall" started by Anita Gillard on or about 1738 ET on 22 Nov 2002.
Once again, it would be quite helpful if you now have any ideas as to how this happened.
--
Regards, Joseph V. Morris |
|
 jazzman916Life on the UpbeatPremium,MVM,ExMod 2004-10
join:2001-09-01
Birdland | reply to jvmorris
Re: Norton Internet Security 2003 Not Allowing Ema said by jvmorris:
Maybe Randy, or Jazzman, or CrazyM could check their setups to see is this is some sort of new default setting in NIS/NPF 2003?
I echo CrazyM and Randy. 110 and 25 are not in the port list as the default. Have you installed any other packet filtering, ad blocking softweare that NIS would have for some crazy reason added those ports to the list?
--
Are you getting the most from your broadband connection? Jump on over to the Tweaks Forum to find out. |
|
jvmorrisI Am The Man Who Was Not There.Premium,MVM
join:2001-04-03
Reston, VA | said by jazzman916:
... Have you installed any other packet filtering, ad blocking softweare that NIS would have for some crazy reason added those ports to the list?
Jazz,
I agree. Something is causing these additional ports to show up in that listing and it would be very nice to know what it is. (I've already asked Anita to post back if she has any ideas.)
Actually, I think I saw several postings prior to Joel's complaining about this problem elsewhere, but (not having NIS/NPF 2003) I was at a loss to answer them. So, yes, it would be invaluable to locate the source, because I think we're likely to see more queries about this in the future.
--
Regards, Joseph V. Morris |
|
