How To Subscribe and Unsubscribe is at the end of this note. Mailing List Trouble? See http://langa.com/help.htm
Questions about the advertisers? See the end of this note. Please also see legal notices at the end of this note. LangaList: ISSN 1533-1156

Please recommend the LangaList to a friend! (And maybe win a prize!)

An easier-to read formatted HTML version of this newsletter is available
<a href=" http://langa.com/newsletters/2005/2005-08-22.htm ">here</a>

The LangaList
Standard Edition

2005-08-22

A Free Email Newsletter from Fred Langa
That Helps You Get More From Your Hardware, 
Software, and Time Online

Please visit our sponsors and help keep the LangaList S.E. free!

1) Reader Feedback (And More): The New ZoneAlarm

You may recall that last month ZoneLabs (the makers of the popular desktop firewall, ZoneAlarm) released a major new version: It added features to a product that had already grown far beyond basic firewall functions to include blocking of hostile email attachments, monitoring of the antivirus protection provided by third-party tools, protecting against the outbound activities of mass-mailing worms, popup blocking, ID protection, and more. With each new function, of course, the software package became larger and more complex.

The newest version adds still more features, including an "OS-level firewall" that attempts to prevent potentially hostile behavior by system-level software. Working in ways analogous to that of antivirus or antimalware tools, the new ZoneAlarm monitors for suspicious software behavior, but does so at a very low level, even trying to see which software components are opening threads and why. When it spots potentially dangerous actions, ZoneAlarm pops up a security dialog. You can block the suspicious action, allow it once, or allow it permanently; much the same as ZA has always let you control internet connection activity.

This "OS-level firewall" is potentially a very useful feature. Combined with ZA's normal firewall features, plus good antivirus/antimalware tools, and XP's own "System Restore" ( http://www.informationweek.com/story/IWK20020711S0009 ) and "Data Execution Prevention," (see http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Data+Execution+Prevention%22 ; #12 in http://www.langalist.com/plus/newsletters/2005/2005-04-07plus.asp ; #11 in http://www.langalist.com/plus/newsletters/2005/2005-04-14plus.asp ) , ZA's new features should help lock down a system against just about all normal attack vectors.

But--- you knew there had to be a "but," right?--- the new ZoneAlarm is the most complex ever. The previous versions in the 5.x series had been creeping up through the mid-5MB range; the new 6.x version jumps to almost 9MB. An even more complex and complete version (which adds things such as its own antivirus tool, identity theft/privacy protection, anti-phishing and spam blocking, IM security/web site filtering, and more) weighs in at 22MB.

ZA's growing complexity prompted me to write this in this newsletter ( http://langa.com/newsletters/2005/2005-07-28.htm#4 ) when the new version first appeared:

My main concern with this and similar tools that are getting more and more complex is the possibility--- maybe even probability--- of negative interactions between different tools as each tries to carry out a similar function. Colloquially, we've referred to that as security tools "stepping on each other's toes."

As a result, I suggest waiting a bit when the new ZoneAlarm is offered (some users are getting the update notices right now...). The pre-update version is fine, and works well--- there's no urgent need to upgrade. Let other braver or risk-loving souls take the plunge, and watch for feedback. Once the new tool has been installed on a couple million systems (it won't take long) we'll *know* if there are problems with the new ZoneAlarm tool conflicting with, say, Norton or Sygate or AntiSpyWare or other tools. My guess is that some conflicts are almost inevitable; but I also think the folks at Zonelabs will get things fixed pretty fast. So, a few weeks or a month or two after release, the new ZA tools should be stable and ironed out enough to be fine.

As this is not a minor upgrade of the current ZA, but something far more complex, I *strongly* urge you not to jump in headfirst as soon as the new version is out. Let others see if the water's safe, and when it is, *then* dive in. <g>

OTOH, if you're an experienced user with a stable, well-backed-up system, and decide to take the plunge early, drop me a line and tell us what your experiences were. Please put "Zonealarm" in the email's subject line. Thanks!

Many of your fellow readers responded, and I've gathered a representative sampling; enough to give you a pretty good idea of their reported experiences. I've added my own experiences with ZA6, and then used that as a springboard for a wider discussion of the relative merits of all-in-one, complex software suites versus simple, focused, stand-alone tools. I also provide lists of both kinds of security tools, with live URLs so you can grab your own copies.

It's all available now, free, at http://www.informationweek.com/1052/langa.htm .

There's a ton of hard-won info there, courtesy of your fellow readers--- check it out!

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

--- ( Your Clicks On Ad Links Help Keep The LangaList S.E. Free! ) ---

"Dear Fred, The move to the Plus! subscription was the best
investment I made, ever.... I always read it with anticipated interest, and also
always find good advice and interesting topics that expand my understanding
of computers. As a matter of fact, I have become a sort of minor PC guru
among my friends, thanks to you. Cordially yours, Petre Muresan"

Thanks, Petre!

The Plus! edition is just pennies an issue--- about $1 a month--- but that
small amount gets you a boatload of benefits. Get all the details:

http://langa.com/plus.htm

--------------( the above is an advertisement )--------------

2) Which Encryption Type?

Fred, I recently read a report by an encryption expert that stated all encryption programs are not equal or as secure as they lead you to believe. My question is, how do we know how well a program encrypts? Because of the esoteric workings of these programs, it is impossible for even the technologically knowledgeable computer user to analyze the cypher strength, and as the above article I read stated, most security experts are not sophisticated enough to make a scientific judgment. The article goes on to show how quickly some encryption was defeated. How do we know the claims and encryption standards are being implemented to the full degree of their potential? Must we go on blind faith. That is scary. ---Len

This is one of the areas where Open Source software can have a true, undeniable advantage: With Open Source implementations of state-of-the-art encryption algorithms, the source code is there for all to see, so no vendor can "pull a fast one" on you with exaggerated, unsubstantiated claims about the product's strengths; and no one can build secret "back doors" into the software for later hostile exploitation.

Open Source implementations also help to avoid the kinds of problems that can arise when a vendor of a proprietary tool goes out of business or changes the software. It has happened in the past that users end up locked out of their own data, with absolutely no easy way to get in!

Some of the best available nonproprietary encryption algorithms include AES ("Rrijndael"), Blowfish, 3DES, and IDEA, along with others.

That said, there also are de facto commercial standards: techniques and implementations used widely enough to function as a standard, even if it isn't formally so. The encrypting file system ("EFS") available in XP/2K's NTFS, for example, is a Microsoft thing, but it's reasonably safe to use because neither Microsoft nor NTFS is going to go away any time soon. <g>

A third element in encryption effectiveness is the cleverness of the user: A user employing a great encryption tool but using a short, easily-guessed password/key is in worse shape than someone using a simpler tool but with cleverness and subtlety.

Example: Back in the early days of PC-based security issues, one of the most widely-used methods of protecting files was the simple password-locked encryption built into ZIP tools. But it's easily hacked. So, one clever user I know did this: he'd take a document he wanted to protect, set up his word processor to print the document sideways, as a huge banner with one letter per sheet of paper, and then (instead of printing to paper) would print the document to a file. He'd then change the file extension--- and sometimes the file headers, too--- to disguise that it was the output of a print-to-file operation, and then would compress the file. (It would squeeze down enormously when ZIPped because it contained so many repeating characters in the banner's large block letters.) He'd then lock the file with the ZIP tool's simple protections. The idea was that even if someone hacked and decompressed the file, they'd most likely see a random collection of characters. It'd be a bit of a leap for someone to think, "Hey, I bet this is a message that's been formatted as a huge banner and then printed to a file instead of paper!" <g>

In today's more sophisticated environment, of course, this would only be very lightweight security. But you get the idea: A little cleverness, combined with good technology, can result in a whole that's stronger than its constituent parts. A more current, simple example: Say you have an Excel spreadsheet you want to protect. If you use the built-in password-protection, you'll gain a small increment of security. If you then save the file as a compressed ZIP file, using WinZip's 256-bit AES encryption and a strong password, you'll lock out all but the most resourceful hackers. Re-encrypt the already-encrypted ZIP file using a third-party Blowfish-encryption tool, and  you'll be at near-governmental levels of security. Store the whole thing in an NTFS encrypted folder, and... well, again, you get the idea.  Depending on how much security you need, you can combine multiple methods, some Open Source and some not, and end up with a level of encryption of almost arbitrary complexity.

Most of the time, of course, you don't need anything that elaborate: A single pass with any credible encryption tool will foil most snoops; and that's usually good enough.

But what tool? Bruce Schneier, noted encryption guru and inventor of the widely-respected Blowfish algorithm, offers this page, which also links to some 150 products using Blowfish: http://www.schneier.com/blowfish.html .

AES, a US-government-approved standard cipher, (see http://csrc.nist.gov/CryptoToolkit/aes/rijndael/ ) is already being used in a ton of products. Some have been formally validated as compliant:  http://www.csrc.nist.gov/cryptval/aes/aesval.html . Many others have not, but may work just as well (there's no requirement to be validated): http://www.google.com/search?q=aes+algorithm+software

I generally stick with Blowfish, AES, or (if neither of those is available) 3DES (aka "triple DES"). I think any one of those works fine for most normal security needs.

When choosing between similar products or implementations, in general, look for ones that support longer keys. For example, a product using a 256-bit key can be harder to crack than one using 64- or 128-bit keys. In fact, software using 64-bit keys and lower is too weak for serious use today; 64-bit ciphers are crackable by brute-force attacks by today's best desktop hardware. (Bruce Schneier even offers a Win95 screensaver toy that can brute-force crack a common 40-bit cipher, just for fun! http://www.schneier.com/smime.html That's how powerful today's PCs are--- a screensaver toy can crack some 40-bit encryption methods!) 128-bit security is still thought to be mostly OK; it's beyond what most desktop hardware can crack, now. But if 256-bit (and even higher) key support is readily available, why not use it? It'll be a long time before desktop PCs are powerful enough to brute-force their way through 256-bit encryption. <g>

In all cases, the quality of the password/key (length, complexity, randomness) matters a lot because a cheesy/short/easily-guessed password key can render even the world's best encryption tool vulnerable. Use a good password/key!
http://search.atomz.com/search/?sp-q=password&sp-a=0008002a-sp00000000

Lots more info:
http://www.techweb.com/encyclopedia/defineterm.jhtml?term=AES
http://www.techweb.com/encyclopedia/defineterm.jhtml?term=blowfish
http://www.schneier.com/resources.html
http://www.mycrypto.net/encryption/crypto_algorithms.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cipher
http://www.google.com/search?q=encrypt+algorithm

NTFS/EFS:
http://langa.com/u/f.htm and http://langa.com/u/g.htm

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

3) More Tools Like "BartPE..."

Dear Fred, Apropos of your very clear Informationweek article on BartPE ["A Must-Have Repair And Recovery Tool" http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=167100904 ] (which has saved my bacon a couple of times in the past) -- here's something which looks interesting and perhaps worthy of another article... http://www.reatogo.de/index.htm ---Rajeev Rohatgi

Fred, Just read your article on BartPE. I've been using [earlier versions] for about 2 yrs to recover unbootable computers, but now there is an even better tool, built on the BartPE disk. Check out http://www.ubcd4win.com and build the cd and try it. You will be amazed! PS saw it on the http://www.dailyrotation.com website (in the Shell Extension City headlines), a great place to keep up with the computer world. ---Gordon Golden

Thank you, Rajeev and Gordon!

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

4) ...And Other Handy CD/ISO Tools

I found a little utility for making ISO files [like a drive image, except of a CD or DVD] from CD/DVD disks.  It is a handy little tool that does not require installation. LCISOCreator.exe is available from http://www.lucersoft.com/freeware.php .

In my case I have a server that is at a hosting company, so I can't just drop a CD in when needed.  I can upload an ISO file, and then mount that ISO as a virtual CD using another utility.  Personally I use Daemon Tools. ( http://www.daemon-tools.cc/dtcc/portal/index.php ) which is also free for private use.  It does require installation and updates from time to time.

Some other 'cd building' tools will let you save an ISO or other type of disk image instead of burning to CD directly.  Mounting that image will allow you to test it out before burning it.  That way you can modify it without wasting a blank CD.

For laptop users, using this method can save battery power because you don't have to spin up your CD-rom drive.  And in general, my experience has been that since the data is really on the hard disk, there is much less delay and a higher read speed than from a real CD.

As always, I hope some of your readers find this useful.  I really enjoy your newsletter and always find something useful in them. ---Roy Flint

Thanks, Roy!

(A side note for readers who may have "Virtual PC" ( http://search.atomz.com/search/?sp-q=vpc&sp-a=0008002a-sp00000000 ) installed: VPC has a built-in facility for mounting a CD as an ISO image, inside a virtual PC. Although this is meant as a way for each VPC to have its own, separate virtual CD, it also can function as a ISO builder!)

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

5) Faster Download Trick

Hello Fred: I'm a plus subscriber and ALWAYS read the newsletter. Here is a comment/tip.  I read that you should always choose the closest mirror when downloading software.  I live in the Bay Area of California, and I find the overseas servers are (most times in the day), much faster than the busy servers close to me.  When I say, "much faster", I have measured several downloads at 10 times faster from servers in England, Germany, and Japan, rather than California, doing the downloads within a couple of minutes from each other.  With 20 million legal inhabitants in California, I think this may be true in this state. ---Cliff Babcock

Good point, Cliff. Two major factors that can affect download speed are (1) network latency ("lag"); and (2) server response.

Latency is the combined effect of the time consumed by every hop or routing segment that your data packets must traverse on their way to or from the server you're connected to. Although electricity flows through wiring at nearly the speed of light, delays creep in every time the signal must be routed, amplified, or otherwise processed. It's not unusual for a typical connection to involve 20 or more hops or segments; and the aggregate delays or latency can really slow things down. The usual advice about using a nearby server is meant to minimize the number of such hops/segments/delays.

But server load also plays a large part in determining download efficiency. If you're talking to a server that's totally swamped with download requests, you won't get very far, even if the server's just down the street. In fact, when a server is swamped, even an infinitely fast network pipe isn't going to help, because the bottleneck's inside the server, not out on the network. In cases like that, finding a distant server with a very light load may indeed result in better overall throughput.

This is an area where thinking globally can help: Most ISPs and public servers see their lightest loads between about 2-4 AM, local time. When you're presented with a choice of download locations, choosing a server located in a part of the world where it's currently 2-4 AM may get you better throughputs than from a busy server that's physically much closer!

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

6) Is This Information Useful?

If you think the LangaList is a worthwhile read, maybe a friend would find it useful too! Just use the following link to recommend the LangaList---your friend may find a new source of useful information and you just may win one of three FREE ONE YEAR SUBSCRIPTIONS to the LangaList Plus! edition given each month. (If your name is drawn and you're already a Plus! subscriber, your current subscription will be extended by a full year.)

Check out the details at http://langa.com/recommend.htm . Thanks for recommending the LangaList--- and good luck!

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

7) Reader Finds Simple Fan Noise Fix

Hi Fred, I switched my front fan with my back fan, and it sounds like it's much quieter.

I read somewhere today that it's a good idea to check the fans with the case open and make sure they're blowing the right way, so I did that.  I wonder if maybe either both fans were mistakenly blowing in or out, and if that was causing one of the fans to vibrate loudly.

In any case (no pun intended :), I think it's a good idea to do a final check as someone suggested. ---Steve

Thanks, Steve. Yes, generally, you want "flow-through" ventilation in a PC. If you have more than one fan, generally you either have them both blowing out (with an opening somewhere else in the case supplying cool air) or one blowing out and one blowing in.

The usual reasons for vibration, though, aren't from pressure effects but from simple mechanical things: Loose fasteners; crud on a fan blade, making it imbalanced; worn motor bearings; etc. Any one of those items could have been ameliorated by your moving the fan--- you may have tightened a loose fastener; knocked some crud off a blade;  re-oriented a fan so pooled lubricant flowed back into the bearings; etc. Whatever the problem was, you found how easy it is to fix. In fact, fans are so easy to move, tighten down, or replace--- they're often under $5--- there's really no reason to put up with excessive fan noise. My simple rule of thumb: If you can hear a PC from across the room; or if it bothers you *at all* when you're sitting next to it, it's too loud!

See:

Getting The Grunge Out Of Your PC: http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=60403472

Cool And Quiet:
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml;?articleID=21401323

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

8) More Reader Sites!

Do you have a home page or website? (It doesn't matter what size.) Please click over to http://langa.com/code.htm , and maybe you can join the hundreds and hundreds of LangaList readers who have "Loaded the Code!" (If you've already "Loaded The Code" and are wondering if your site will appear here or on the Langa.Com web site, please see http://langa.com/link.txt )

Speaking of which: Here's another eclectic sample of reader sites--- some professional, some very personal:

View A Randomly-Chosen Reader Site From Among All Listed
http://langa.com/randomlink.htm

Manually Browse All Posted-to-Date Sites Starting At
http://langa.com/readersites.htm

Windows maintenance tasks and protection
http://www.jstechs.com/

Cakes by Darlene Home
http://www.cakesbydarlene.ca/

cultivated web
http://www.cultivatedweb.com/resources.shtml

extreme west rv rentals
http://www.extremewestrvrentals.com/

midwestrocklobster
http://midwestrocklobster.blogspot.com/

novapdf
http://www.novapdf.com/links.php

tutorials and advice for everyone
http://homemade-tutorials.blogspot.com/atom.xml

Digital Images for business and individuals
http://www.letsgetdigital.ca/main.html

dreams of infinity
http://plainofvisions.blogspot.com/

darussell photography
http://www.darussell.com/

leftover chef
http://www.leftoverchef.com/home/

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

9) Disk Space In The Wrong Place

Fred: My problem is my Sony VAIO (P4),  XP,Media Edition, came partitioned w/ a 10 gig "C", for programs and 60 gig "D" for whatever. I have a lot of graphics/video files on "D", but I could do with just 40 gigs on this drive. Problem is all of the updates and programs have left me w/ only about 15 megs of free space on "C" and 50 gigs on "D".   To even run defrag, on C, I need 24 megs of free space to run that program! (have been unable to remove enough files from C to run defrag so far) I would like to make "C" partition at least 15 gigs more available space. 
 
 I could have installed programs to "D", but when you change the software installation default (i.e., "C") , the program never seems to work properly.
 
From everything I can comprehend about partitioning - something usually gets "lost".  What about compressing the drive "C" - Would this provide the requisite additional space on C w/o the loss of program data- or am  just going to trade one problem for another ???
 
Any suggestions on how to do this w/minimum loss of program data would be appreciated. ---Dan Slagle

Compression, available as a built-in option on NTFS drives, can work well, especially on higher-end systems. Conceptually, it's like ZIPping a file, folder, or entire drive; and can store a given amount of raw data in half the space, more or less, than otherwise. The downsides to compression are that it consumes a little CPU horsepower, which may be noticeable on underpowered PCs; and that it's a one-use thing: You gain nothing by compressing files that are already compressed, such as JPGs, ZIP files, and so on. Plus, NTFS makes you choose between encryption OR compression. If you use NTFS for either one, you have to use a third-party tool for the other. See " http://langa.com/u/h.htm " or search for "compression" in XP's "Help And Support" system.

But in your case, because many of your files already are compressed, a partitioning tool might be a better answer--- one that lets you change the size of existing partitions nondestructively; that is, without losing the data. You can, for example, take some amount of free space away from your D partition and add it to your C partition.

There are many tools to do this, including my favorite, the powerful (but admittedly geeky and somewhat hard to use) BootIt ( http://www.terabyteunlimited.com/bootitng.html ). PartitionMagic and a number of other tools also can do this: http://www.google.com/search?q=resize+partition+nondestructive  or http://www.google.com/search?q=manage+partition To further refine either search, add whatever disk type you have--- NTFS, FAT32, FAT16, etc.--- as an additional search term.

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

10) Just For Grins

At last, Fred...firewall protection for the Brain!  See: http://zapatopi.net/mindguard.html  Best regards, Dave Miller

Thanks, Dave. It's so much classier than the tinfoil hat I normally use. 8-)

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

11) Plus! Edition Highlights:

Today's LangaList Plus! Edition contains all ten items above, plus about 40% more content including:

• Better Than "Find And Run Robot?"
    (bypass clogged menu structures...)
• Disappearing Devices
     (how to get 'em back into Windows)
• More On Printer Re-Re-Reinstalls...
     (tame the "new hardware found" beast)
• More Linux Tips From Readers
     (real-life advice!)

Plus--- you get access to over 100,000 additional words in special features, extra content and private links, all on a private web site, all for about a dollar a month!

Full Plus! Edition info: http://langa.com/plus.htm

Click to email this item to a friend
http://langa.com/sendit.htm

return to top of page

(Give a gift subscription to the LangaList Plus edition!
Click <a href= " http://langa.com/plus_gift.htm ">here</a>)

The LangaList is published about 72 times a year, or about 6 times a month. See you next issue, 2005-08-25!

Best,

Fred
( Editor@Langa.Com )

Please recommend the LangaList to a friend! (And maybe win a prize!)

An easier-to read formatted HTML version is available in the "Current Issue" section of http://langa.com.  (The HTML version of each issue normally is available by 9AM EST [UT-5] of the issue date.) All past LangaList issues are also available at the Langa.Com site.

return to top of page

Administrivia:

UNSUBSCRIBE (instant removal!): http://langa.com/leave_langalist.htm

SUBSCRIBE (it's free!): http://langa.com/join_langalist.htm

CHANGE ADDRESS? LIST TROUBLE? HAVE QUESTIONS? OTHER PROBLEM? NEED HELP? See http://langa.com/help.htm

This newsletter is SPAM PROOF and requires two levels of subscriber confirmation before delivery begins: See http://langa.com/info.htm

About the advertisers: http://langa.com/privacy.htm#ads

Disclaimer: http://langa.com/legal.htm  In brief: All information herein is offered as-is and without warranty of any kind. Neither Langa Consulting LLC, nor its employees nor contributors are responsible for any loss, injury, or damage, direct or consequential, resulting from your choosing to use any information presented here.

This newsletter is a service of Langa Consulting LLC and is Copyright © 2005 Fred Langa / Langa Consulting LLC. All worldwide rights reserved. LangaList: ISSN 1533-1156

return to top of page