Jump to content

"Compilation Of Tutorials, Guides, Tips & Updates"


dcs18

Recommended Posts

27 minutes ago, Undertaker said:

What I don't understand is how IP block is not working but CIDR is in my WFC? While both of them work on the same principle.

Did you disable Adguard before trying them both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 7.3k
  • Views 997.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Undertaker
8 hours ago, dcs18 said:

Did you disable Adguard before trying them both?

Yes sir, I did.

BTW it will only appear in Adguard if it bypasses through the FW stage. Otherwise, it will be blocked at FW,requiring no need of Adguard intervention but yeah, I did close it before testing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


13 hours ago, Undertaker said:

What I don't understand is how IP block is not working but CIDR is in my WFC? While both of them work on the same principle.

Did you notice that after some time, the CIDR rule in WFC turns from 169.32.0.0/11 to 169.32.0.0/255.224.0.0?

 

It's affecting a range from 169.32.0.0 to 169.63.255.255 (that's quite substantial — what value did you use as a IP filter?)

   
Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker
42 minutes ago, dcs18 said:

Did you notice that after some time, the CIDR rule in WFC turns from 169.32.0.0/11 to 169.32.0.0/255.224.0.0?

 

It's affecting a range from 169.32.0.0 to 169.63.255.255 (that's quite substantial — what value did you use as a IP filter?)

   

The GUI change of CIDR is intentional I think, nothing wrong with that. Win FW in its record keeps it as 169.32.0.0/11 only while WFC keeps it in this form IP/SubnetMask(169.32.0.0/255.224.0.0). Infact you will see WFC changes the CIDR to IP/SubnetMask form as soon as you choose refresh list from right side bar. Maybe that's how they read stuff.

 

BTW, I changed the CIDR IP to 169.55.0.0/18 (covers both 169.55.40.5 and  169.55.0.224) and this is 1/100part or 1% of the earlier one that I mentioned.

 

Another thing is that I tried some older builds of WFC and they are working as they should(no bypassing) but as soon as I updated to latest version bypassing started, So the bug maybe in WFC. I have two untouched WFC builds, I'm trying 4.8.3.0 version and there were no bypass(2-3 hrs) until I updated to latest version(bypassed within 5 mins). If you want I can upload another build(4.9.4.0) for your testing, that is if only you are interested.

 

Note: When testing for bypass, CIDR rules were disabled and testing was done only with IP rules.

         CIDR rules continue to work even in latest build.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, Undertaker said:

BTW, I changed the CIDR IP to 169.55.0.0/18 (covers both 169.55.40.5 and  169.55.0.224) and this is 1/100part or 1% of the earlier one that I mentioned.

 

Note: When testing for bypass, CIDR rules were disabled and testing was done only with IP rules.

         CIDR rules continue to work even in latest build.

The CIDR has a very limited role in firewalling and the only time it should be used is when all IPs confirmed for blocking are in a consecutive order — IPs to be blocked for IDM are certainly not in consecutive order.

 

If used indiscriminately, CIDR would only cause collateral damage by blocking valid IPs.

 

Moreover, an indiscriminate use points to trial-n-error through a hit-n-miss implementation — it kills the art form in firewalling and exposes a knowledge deficit.

 

If however, even if all IPs confirmed for blocking were in a consecutive order, my personal preference would be to use the IP range (169.55.0.0-169.55.63.255 instead of 169.55.0.0/18) — if not in consecutive order, with necessary changes made in the range.

 

 

2 hours ago, Undertaker said:

Another thing is that I tried some older builds of WFC and they are working as they should(no bypassing) but as soon as I updated to latest version bypassing started, So the bug maybe in WFC. I have two untouched WFC builds, I'm trying 4.8.3.0 version and there were no bypass(2-3 hrs) until I updated to latest version(bypassed within 5 mins). If you want I can upload another build(4.9.4.0) for your testing, that is if only you are interested.

Initially, I suspected a WFC IP leak bug and wanted to use my status update to appeal to Users of the firewall method to come forward and share their experience about their IDM activation — however, found that my status update was not working (shall make an appeal soon.)


In the meanwhile, you could upload the WFC installer confirmed as working — shall check it out for any leaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker

I understand what you're saying but had to maintain activation by some sort :P

 

Site: https://www.upload.ee
Sharecode[?]: /files/7086160/wfc4setup_old_.exe.html

 

This is 4.8.3.0 build which has been working flawlessly for 6 hrs now(even after numerous program and system restarts).

I will use this build for a couple of days and then upgrade to 4.9.4.0 version(the last old version I have).

 

My exported settings and rules backup from new version were successfully imported in this older version, just had to adjust the notification option.

 

Scratch that, just now IDM bypassed WFC, thank god for Adguard(Saved me again)

Back to start. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites


They seem to have changed the key bypassing IP from 169.55.40.5 to 169.55.0.224. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker

At my side, after flushing DNS, restarting modem as well as system, it is still 169.55.40.5 While 169.55.0.224 is being used for update check.

:think:

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker

When download completes IDM is connecting to test.internetdownloadmanager.com :think:

 

Spoiler

https://i.imgur.com/xHQtbLZ.png

 

Spoiler

https://i.imgur.com/uGvAobD.png

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I had check a few times with TrashReg and no still nothing... Then I had take a look on a few topics (and to give examples) :


It seem's the solution will be one medicine. Because the trial period seem to be restored and no, the bat files didn't work... Unless you want to be bored by another popup (I don't know why but instead 10 days to register IDM, it was 4 days).

At least, so far I didn't see those popups again and unless WFC fix the bug, I won't try (to register it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker
12 minutes ago, Ecarion said:

At least, so far I didn't see those popups again and unless WFC fix the bug, I won't try (to register it).

On it Sir, BTW it might not be a WFC bug after all.

 

@FaeGiN

I see you following this topic all day long, you have something to say too? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites


When the IDM site is blocked, via hosts — one can still surf them (there's an error only when the page is reloaded/refreshed.) :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker
4 minutes ago, dcs18 said:

When the IDM site is blocked, via hosts — one can still surf them (there's an error only when the page is reloaded/refreshed.) :D

That means it is bypassing hosts also because that shouldn't be happening, right?

One time bypass is enough to de-activate IDM :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites


They have adopted a completely new implementation which causes every connection to loopback — as a test example you can try all those 27 block IPs on Firefox instead of IDM and surf their site.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


knowledge-Spammer
7 minutes ago, dcs18 said:

They have adopted a completely new implementation which causes every connection to loopback — as a test example you can try all those 27 block IPs on Firefox instead of IDM and surf their site.

inbox me pls my friend  as i cant inbox u

Link to comment
Share on other sites


knowledge-Spammer

i have a feeling we have talked befor  ill not say but i have feeling we was friend sometime ago ?

can it  be u ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker
Just now, knowledge said:

Undertaker

i have a feeling we have talked befor  ill not say but i have feeling we was friend sometime ago ?

can it  be u ?

I thought the name was a dead giveaway,lol. :P  Again, yes I'm that guy only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


knowledge-Spammer
1 minute ago, Undertaker said:

I thought the name was a dead giveaway,lol. :P  Again, yes I'm that guy only.

its good to talk with u again longtime now

Link to comment
Share on other sites


knowledge-Spammer
17 minutes ago, A.lemane said:

how come am the only one who dosnt remember this guy 

i was friends with him longtime ago  but i was not sure if was him or not  but i did have feeling it my old friend

Link to comment
Share on other sites


How are these firewall blocking in IDM to be work if you are a VPN user (system-wide)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


ATM, the focus is on getting IDM to work normally, ASAP — VPN would be the last thing on everyone's mind. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker
12 hours ago, dcs18 said:

They have adopted a completely new implementation which causes every connection to loopback

But could it bypass IPSec in this way?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker

@dcs18

I'm assuming hosts ain't working either, you tried that I think, what was the result?

 

I think if somehow, we're able to block the connection to test.internetdownloadmanager.com, IDM would retains its activation. As you were talking of loopback connection, I think that is the loopback.

 

Because if you don't download anything then IDM is retaining activation, it is only when you download something that activation gives in and the only change while downloading is test.internetdownloadmanager.com

 

Yep confirmed, that domain is the loopback.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Undertaker
1 hour ago, Undertaker said:

I'm assuming hosts ain't working either, you tried that I think, what was the result?

Yeah hosts is not working either, it's only able to block the connection partially. :s

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Matrix locked this topic

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...