Outpost Referrers NoNo

[Rainwalker]

I have sent the OP people a note indicating that i feel they should release a patch to fix the problem that many of us are unhappy about concerning a flag popping up for webmasters to see, informing them we are using OP :o
I feel word of mouth, forums and standard promotional procedures are all that is needed to sell product. Firewalls are supposed to be first and foremost about security ............................ i think ::)
Maybe others who are concerned would also write them :D

[optigrab]

Hi Rainwalker,

Would you please post further details or a link to describe the activity you're concerned about? Though I'm quite interested, I cannot figure out what you're referring to.

I searched for your userid on the outpost forum with no luck, and I'm afraid I haven't been lurking there as much as I used to.

Regards
Optigrab

[LowWaterMark]

I think Rainwalker is talking about this line:

"Field blocked by Outpost (http://www.agnitum.com)"

I believe Outpost has that set as the default "referring page" when passing referrer to a webserver while browsing pages. So, one thing this does is tell the webserver (and the people running the web site) what firewall the visitor is using. And it is a little bit of an advertisement I guess, although the only people who can see it are the webmasters that have access to their webserver logs.

If Agnitum wanted to keep their users anonymous, they should either pass a blank referrer or perhaps fake one - perhaps - although I don't block referrer myself because I'm not terribly concerned about giving that information out.

[hayc59]

Rainwalker, Agnitum is very aware ;)
here is the info directly from Agnitum
-{ Quote: "Official response from Agnitum:
Per-site referrer control - Agnitum plans to implement this feature of the next update of Outpost kernel
" }-
'Field Block'
-{ Quote: "Change the "field blocked by Outpost" string - No immidiate plans to change it.
" }-
Hope this helps some and you are not the only one waiting !!

[Rainwalker]

I am pleased the OP people are on this but a patch would not be a problem and i was hoping they would do this. I am also not that concerned about webmasters seeing where i am coming from but if that feature is going to be plugged in then i feel it should be done without letting others know what firewall i am using. That really does bother me. The day after i mailed them i received a response indicating they would pass on the info to their development team or something to that effect. When did they say they would include the fix in the next release? This could a bit of a wait. At anyrate thanks for letting me know. :)

[hayc59]

RainWalker,it was on the 19th of Feb.
Sorry I could not give you more :)

[Rainwalker]

Thanks again hayc59. By the way i really like your avatar. I have spent many years making a living on the salt. How sweet it is ;)

[optigrab]

-{ Quote: " quoting: LowWaterMark link=board=23;threadid=23129;start=0#msg138824 date=1078269374]
I think Rainwalker is talking about this line:

"Field blocked by Outpost (http://www.agnitum.com)"

I believe Outpost has that set as the default "referring page" when passing referrer to a webserver while browsing pages. So, one thing this does is tell the webserver (and the people running the web site) what firewall the visitor is using. And it is a little bit of an advertisement I guess, although the only people who can see it are the webmasters that have access to their webserver logs.

If Agnitum wanted to keep their users anonymous, they should either pass a blank referrer or perhaps fake one - perhaps - although I don't block referrer myself because I'm not terribly concerned about giving that information out.
" }-

Thanks LWM

I see the concern now. I don't block referrer's myself, but it seems like a patch would be a semi-easy thing to write. I recall that someone at the Outpost forum posted an [ad txt] patch, and now this feature is part of v2.1.

Optigrab