Skip navigation
1 2 3 4 ... 6 Previous Next 15568 Views 56 Replies Latest reply: Mar 28, 2012 11:09 PM by HeadhunterSeven RSS Go to original post
  • iif0xh0undii GlobalModerator 10,709 posts since
    May 23, 2011

    Under "Configuring Your Router" I'm a bit skeptive of what you're instructing people to do.

     

    You have users turn off the firewall, put their PlayStation into the DMZ (Which avoids the firewall), enable UPNP (which isn't needed if the system has a static IP in the DMZ), set the NAT to open (Which isn't an option to simply choose), Trigger every single port, put the PS3 in the highest QOS and then allow everything into the imbound filter.

     

    Why make someone do all that?

     

    A simple breakdown should be

     

    1. MAC/Static IP into the DMZ

    2. Give PS3 a high priority QOS

     

    The rest is all fluff and essentially dangerous.

  • iif0xh0undii GlobalModerator 10,709 posts since
    May 23, 2011

    dexter1992 wrote:

     

    iif0xh0undii wrote:

     

    Under "Configuring Your Router" I'm a bit skeptive of what you're instructing people to do.

     

    You have users turn off the firewall, put their PlayStation into the DMZ (Which avoids the firewall), enable UPNP (which isn't needed if the system has a static IP in the DMZ), set the NAT to open (Which isn't an option to simply choose), Trigger every single port, put the PS3 in the highest QOS and then allow everything into the imbound filter.

     

    Why make someone do all that?

     

    A simple breakdown should be

     

    1. MAC/Static IP into the DMZ

    2. Give PS3 a high priority QOS

     

    The rest is all fluff and essentially dangerous.

    I explain that it takes away security, when gaming you want nothing in the way from you and the internet. The reason I say to do all that is, some people don't have DMZ function in their router, and some people have UPnP issues. I have currently have all those settings enabled in mine for years and never had an issue. Also I run inbound/outbound fiewalls on my PCs. The settings you suggested will not fully work. I had to disable the SPI and and set Nat to open to get an open nat in game. And it's not dnagerous if you know what you are doing.

     

    That's the problem though. If you know what you are doing it isn't dangerous. You can't possibly know if someone knows what they're doing by disabling everything.

     

    Some of what you suggested is entirely redundant as well. You don't need to enable UPnP if you've placed your PS3 into the DMZ. All of the traffic is unchecked by the firewall. If people don't have a DMZ option in their router then they should port forward. If they can't do that either they need to go ahead and purchase a new router all together. What I suggested will work. Trust me, I've done it myself on more than one type of router with varying features.

  • iif0xh0undii GlobalModerator 10,709 posts since
    May 23, 2011

    dexter1992 wrote:

     

    I have never had an issue, I think you are on a wild goose chase. Everything I listed will work, dosen't matter if more than one setting is enabled that do the same thing essentially.

     

    Of course the settings will work, but that doesn't mean you're offering the safest information available. It only works because you're turning off the entire NAT of the router and shoving a bunch of redundant information into it. This is the equivalent of dropping a nuke on the solution. I'll advise most users to avoid your networking input.

  • Calculating status... 9 posts since
    Sep 23, 2011

    there are a lot of words there

  • mdub Expert 1,764 posts since
    Sep 19, 2011

    I appreciate that the OP is trying to help, but I hope people dont do what he is saying. A simple Static IP/DMZ and high QOS is all you need. If your setup doesnt allow for this, buy a new router. Turning off all the security is not a good idea, no matter what anyone tells you. All of my above statements are my own opinion of course.

  • iif0xh0undii GlobalModerator 10,709 posts since
    May 23, 2011

    Dexter, it's obvious that there is concern to be had here. Simply because this setup works for you is no reason to advise it to everyone. You can't account for everyone's home network setup and disregarding concern is ignorant at best.

     

    Many of us understand that we need some forum of virus protection software, malware/spyware protection software and possibly even registry cleaners, but there are many more who don't. Instructing them to compromise their network's structural integrity for a game should never be acceptable. It's flat out dangerous.

     

    That isn't putting the community first, and if that's the goal of this thread then you really need to step back and think logically. Ideas like "the internet is not safe," "no one's network is entirely 100% secure," "networking equipment/software isn't made equally," and "gamers just want to play, I'm helping them do that" are not reasons to remove an additional layer of security. There are far too many variables that can happen, or preexist, which can possibly put users at risk. Never take that for granted.

     

    As a moderator, I'm instructing you to go forth with your idea to rewrite or remove those options. Create a disclaimer that such actions could potentially put the user at risk. Failure to make these changes will result in the locking of this thread. Community saftey and atmosphere are my greatest concerns. This is a stance I should have taken previously, but I'm glad another user came forth with concerns about saftey.

     

    You have 24 hours to comply.

1 2 3 4 ... 6 Previous Next

Actions

Bookmarked By (0)