instant messengers and security

[J.L.Francois]

I understand the use of IP-MASQ simplifies some things, but
in some cases a SOCKsified application just works better.

Back to the original question.
If you are doing any type of instant messaging and want to
"tighten" up your secure settings, because of known or
unknown security issues, and do so without sacrificing
internal to external connectivity, proxies like SOCKS will
help dramatically.

Ok....I am tired, the sentence above is just too long
and I am too lazy to rewrite it.

JLF Sends...

It seems like on Sat, Jun 03, 2000 at 07:22:32PM -0700, datawolf@ibm.net scribbled:
Orig Msg> I'm using IP Masquerading anyway, though, so I doubt SOCKS would help.
Orig Msg> 
Orig Msg> -BVG
Orig Msg> 
Orig Msg> "J.L.Francois" wrote:
Orig Msg> > 
Orig Msg> > It seems like on Sat, Jun 03, 2000 at 03:35:02PM -0700, datawolf@ibm.net scribbled:
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg> Does anyone know if any instant messenger software provides better
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg> security (or less bad security) than others?
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg>
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg> I've set up my firewall at home now that I have DSL, and want to keep it
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg> locked down.  I've been using icq (licq), and wonder if I should
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg> continue to do so.
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg>
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg> -BVG
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg>
Orig Msg> > Orig Msg>
Orig Msg> > 
Orig Msg> > IMHO for doing things like that, a properly configured
Orig Msg> > SOCKS proxy comes in handy for protecting internal hosts.
Orig Msg> > 
Orig Msg> > http://www.socks.nec.com/
Orig Msg> > 
Orig Msg> > I use SOCKS mainly for IRC via mIRC for no other reason than the
Orig Msg> > IP address I return for everything is in the 192.168.0.0/16
Orig Msg> > range and any attacks get directed to the hybrid firewall/proxy box.
Orig Msg> > 
Orig Msg> > My .02
Orig Msg> > 
Orig Msg> > JLF Sends...