Questions and suggestions

Discussion in 'LnS English Forum' started by Uroboros, Oct 16, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Uroboros

    Uroboros Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Posts:
    70
    OK..as per my post in the 2.05p3 thread; I'm still getting generic icons in the list of active applications. Again weird because this is not the case in the list of blocked applications. Haven't been able to figure out why unfortunately.

    So I got to thinking..(now that I've purchased LooknStop) would it be possible in some later version of the program to turn off the icons all together and just have a text only list? I know it's just specific to my issue; but it's a thought.

    When one right clicks on an item in the log list you get all the information regarding the packet. There's a lot of fields there and their corresponding data. Of course the option is there to create a rules based on this log item.

    Problem is though that all the data in the log does not appear in the corresponding fields in the new rule. If you're trying to make a very specific rule you just end up having enter the data manually. Would it be possible to carry over more data from log item to new rule.

    Finally, any chance of actually numbering the rules. This way when rule is logged it just easier to know exactly which rule it was. I know that each rule has a name, and that the name appears in the log; but a number is just easier to locate on a long list of rules. (of course you can name the rules with numbers; but that's not very descriptive)
     
  2. Frederic

    Frederic LnS Developer

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    4,354
    Location:
    France
    Yes, at this time, you are the only one to have reported that, so I'm not sure we will go into specifics :doubt:
    Perhaps there is something with the colors depth, what is the configuration of your graphic card for the colors ?
    Yes, this is something we are considering. We could have all the fields filled in the new rule and next the (experienced) user removing the fields that don't have to be checked.
    The problem is, that this feature is a very advanced one, and I'm afraid some users may add many and many specific rules based on each alert.
    Why not just adding a number in addition of the name ?

    Frederic
     
  3. Uroboros

    Uroboros Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Posts:
    70
    I'm running in 32 bit. I have a very strong feeling that Icon packager from Stardock has something to do with this issue I'm having. But can't really say. Seems it began around the time I first installed some custom icons. (which happen to be around the time the LnS beta was installed here) But the program was already installed when I first started using LnS; and the custom icons are no being used. Of course it's still weird that the icons on the list o the right are correct.

    Anyhow..no big deal. LnS works and the issue is just cosmetic.

    I suppose that's possible. But then again it could be set up as an advanced option not directly out in the open. Most of the people who would do what you say wouldn't even know to look for it.

    Well yes..you could do that. Unless of course you're using some set of rules someone else made. Which would mean you'd have to rename each one.

    Not something I'd want to do unless I knew for sure the programmer would not be adding the feature. :)
     
  4. Frederic

    Frederic LnS Developer

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    4,354
    Location:
    France
    If the initial request was actually to go quickly to the rule from the log, perhaps there is a better way to solve that: adding an item in the context menu to open directly the rule edition dialog box, or to open the Internet Filtering tab and highlight the considered rule.

    Frederic
     
  5. Uroboros

    Uroboros Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Posts:
    70
    That would work as well yes. Hadn't thought of doing it that way. But yes..would be nice to know what rule was activated so that if one wants to create a rule ,for an specific application perhaps; it would be easier to know where to place that rule. As an example.

    Of course it's still easier to remember a rule by a number then it is by the whatever it's been named. But yes, that was my initial request. Your method is more immediate then mine.
     
  6. Phant0m

    Phant0m Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Posts:
    3,684
    Location:
    Canada
    It would be nice to be-capable of making custom list of entries in the context menu to-do rule-addings with saved defined parameters.

    For instance, I can put entry in context menu, I would call it, ‘Primary Server.Auth’, a rule for this entry I had defined already, it’ll add rule by specifications, source-port [Exact Port], destination-port [Temp-Range (1024-5000)]. And I can add another context menu with this setup but also include the Destination-IP parameter.

    In addition; have entries in context menu only show based on packet Inbound, Outbound or Both-way parameters... ;)
     
  7. Frederic

    Frederic LnS Developer

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    4,354
    Location:
    France
    Numbering rules introduces some problems. It can't be absolute, because rules are added/deleted/imported/created by different users. If the numbers change or are not fixed, not easy to remember, and old logs or log from different users will have different number which is not easy to manage.
    That's why I prefer to solve the initial need, by another way.

    Frederic
     
  8. Frederic

    Frederic LnS Developer

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2003
    Posts:
    4,354
    Location:
    France
    Yes, good idea Phant0m, this way it won't be hardcoded in the application, and it can be changed by advanced users on a case by case need.
    This is typically what a plugin could propose.

    Thanks,

    Frederic
     
  9. Phant0m

    Phant0m Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Posts:
    3,684
    Location:
    Canada
    Indeed.. :)
     
  10. Uroboros

    Uroboros Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Posts:
    70

    Makes sense. We'll stick with your method then :)
     
  11. Uroboros

    Uroboros Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Posts:
    70
    OK..the generic icon problem I was having has been fixed. Nothing to do with LnS; most likely the cause was something Icon packager screwed up in the registry. Value delete, problem solved.

    Oh rejoice. :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.