Re: [Full-Disclosure] Why does a home computer user need DCOM?

[Nick FitzGerald <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

hobbit@xxxxxxxxx (*Hobbit*) wrote:

> Once again, I wouldn't mind a way to turn off *ALL* the RPC stuff,
> including the RPC service itself, without paying the price of having
> almost everything I do afterward just sit there and stupidly wait for it
> to respond.  A box with it disabled *will* run, just barely, it'll just
> be sluggish as hell.
> 
> Or at the very least a way to run it so it doesn't listen on a socket
> bound to *.  How 'bout localhost-only, or the equivalent of unix-domain
> pipes, or *something* to keep it insulated from the network??  How 'bout
> the same for SMB/tcp 445?
> 
> Argh.  There's probably some registry hack that *could* do that.

Yes, yes and yes (well, to many of your wishes and depending on which 
Windows flavour you have...).

How many times do I have to post the following link???

Perhaps the best article on making sense of the (idiotic) default MS 
service binding mess is:

   http://www.hsc.fr/ressources/breves/min_srv_res_win.en.html.en


Regards,

Nick FitzGerald

_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html