SpywareGuard causing "Failed" at GRC portscan

Discussion in 'SpywareBlaster & Other Forum' started by skbaltimore, Aug 8, 2004.

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

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    SpywareGuard Possibly Causing "Failed" at GRC portscan?

    I ran a full portscan at GRC running SPF Pro and Spywareguard and even though all the ports reported "Stealth", there was a "Failed" note indicating that there were some "Unsolicited Packets Received". At first I thought it was the result of the new update Sygate issued for SPF Pro. In fact, I was in the middle of typing my post there on that site when - just on a lark, since I had disabled SWG because of the tooltip problem - I ran the test again. And it passed. Then I enabled SWG and ran the test again, and it failed.

    Now, that in and of itself isn't such a major deal, because every port was still stealthed, and I'm aware of some of the "hype" surrounding GRC, etc. But it still concerned me, so I wanted to post the quote from the GRC post-scan result:

    Unsolicited Packets: RECEIVED (FAILED) — Your system's personal security countermeasures unwisely attempted to probe us in response to our probes. While some users believe that "tracking down" the source of Internet probes is useful, experience indicates that there is little to gain and potentially much to lose. The wisest course of action is to simulate nonexistence — which your system has failed to do. Your counter-probes immediately reveal your system's presence and location on the Internet.

    However, after some replies here, I ran it again, and it came out perfect. (See screenshot in post below). So now I'm in a quandry as to what, exactly, was going on, and why.

    sk
     
    Last edited: Aug 8, 2004
  2. Bubba

    Bubba Updates Team

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Posts:
    11,271
    Hey sk,

    Which port scan are you speaking of ?
    I just now ran a few of his scans with SG running\all protection enabled and noting like your message appeared.
     
  3. bigc73542

    bigc73542 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2003
    Posts:
    23,873
    Location:
    SW. Oklahoma
    I also have never had a problem with spywareguard and GRC either, It sounds rather strange.
     
  4. Bubba

    Bubba Updates Team

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2002
    Posts:
    11,271
    I also just ran Steve's Common Port scan with ZAPro disabled\shutdown, SpywareGuard enabled but I did not send any Unsolicited Packets: .
     

    Attached Files:

  5. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    The common port scan passed; the full portscan failed.

    UPDATE: Wow. That's weird. I just ran it again - so I could post a screenshot; and this time it passed. Maybe the problem is with the GRC testing procedure. Weird.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Aug 8, 2004
  6. kwesi

    kwesi Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Posts:
    82
    Location:
    London
    Hi, skbaltimore.

    It would be interesting to know on which ports the problem was occurring, but I bet you don't have those recorded anywhere? I also use SG (& Spywareblaster, & other defence apps), and I've discovered that my hardware router opens certain ports quite surreptitiously (which I've told other users of my router about), but the fact that your fail-result was due to a response of some kind, does make this intriguing for me.

    Hope the problem is fixed now, but I'll keep an eye out for any updates from you.
     
  7. Tassie_Devils

    Tassie_Devils Global Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2002
    Posts:
    2,514
    Location:
    State Queensland, Australia
    Hi skbaltimore...

    Just another reaffirmation from me in all the time I have used SG, I've never failed a Port scan anywhere, anysite, including GRC's.

    Cheers, TAS
     
  8. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    Thanks. Unfortunately, I don't have a record of the ports on which the problem was occurring. And since it's not something readily repeatable, it's hard to nail it down. But I shall also keep an eye out as well. The GRC site does make some vague reference to FW's that supposedly "learn" from one test to the next, and they even suggest trying repeated tests to see if there's any change. I don't know if that's got any bearing on this or not.

    The only other variable I can toss into the mix is that with SpywareGuard I've run into the already-documented mouse/tool tips problem. However, it's not a constant problem; it's intermittent. That makes me wonder if SG is if maybe the problem with the portscan testing is intermittent as well. At this point, obviously, that's only conjecture.
     
  9. skbaltimore

    skbaltimore Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    Posts:
    306
    Hey, Tass. I appreciate the input. Good to see you/hear from you again. (Before I was skbaltimore - Junior Member - I was skay - not Junior member - heheheheh. But I lost my pass and had to open a new account.)

    O.T. You still doin photography? (P.M. me if you feel like it.)
     
    Last edited: Aug 9, 2004
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.