Updating your HOSTS file.

[Aurion]

Well,I guess playing with such a HTTP server is just awesome...since you just keep sending requests by injecting those links into your HOSTS file so they get linked to an invalid IP (I kinda liked the idea btw) which doesn't exist,eventually Windows won't recognize it as a working IP....in the end such links will get auto blocked due to "Connention timed out" handles...

[anon]

No, as a matter of fact it isn't awesome, because all requests that in a non-server PC the hosts file would have blocked go to you! This is a waste of network overhead and CPU.

So, if you are running a HTTP server, replace the 127.0.0.1 by 0.0.0.0 like I said.

You can find such a "zero" ad-blocking hosts file here.

[Aurion]

Since I'm not on a HTTP server so I won't use that...still as I said,I just keep my HOSTS file clean of anything except the normal 127.0.0.1......

[dHV4]

Just use the OpenDNS services, it does block unwanted parasites but solving a lot of other DNS problems.

[anon]

OpenDNS is very good (it got a thread and sticky here ), but as far as I know you can't block advertising with it, unlike with custom HOSTS files - only phishing and spam sites.

[pi_1st]

i have previously used hosts file that is 1MB or more in size, the result was my computer running very slowly.

the dns client service used a lot of memory and cpu. right now i just use my firewall to block all that nonsense, it's fast and more effiecient.

[anon]

i have previously used hosts file that is 1MB or more in size, the result was my computer running very slowly.

Anything above 100KB will make your computer slow.

the dns client service used a lot of memory and cpu. right now i just use my firewall to block all that nonsense, it's fast and more effiecient.

By disabling it, you'll have made your computer poll your name servers resolve addresses for every request, even if you had already visited/connected to the same hosts before.

But blocking ad servers in your firewall instead is a good idea indeed.

[pi_1st]

By disabling it, you'll have made your computer poll your name servers resolve addresses for every request, even if you had already visited/connected to the same hosts before.

luckily my firewall have some configurable dns caching :)

and probably my browser opera cached that too, don't know for sure though

[anon]

luckily my firewall have some configurable dns caching :)

Do you use Outpost..?

and probably my browser opera cached that too, don't know for sure though

Yes, that's also possible, Opera seemed to do that for me sometimes, when I had been playing around with the HOSTS file to make domain X point to IP x.x.x.x, and flushed the DNS cache, yet Opera would try to connect to the same host. Firefox, in turn, can be seen "resolving the address for xxxxx..." after doing the same procedure.

[pi_1st]

Do you use Outpost..?

holly s*** how do you... no comment on that...

you can't sniffs someone firewall? can't you?

i don't publicize that kind of things :)

[anon]

Just thought you could be an OP user as I'm one too (v4) and it has a DNS cache

[pi_1st]

your version is ancient

better go with the security suite package, it has nice small antivirus built-in from virusbuster if i'm not mistaken. but you don't really need antivirus actually, if you play it safe

[anon]

your version is ancient

It works good for me

better go with the security suite package, it has nice small antivirus built-in from virusbuster if i'm not mistaken.

I know, but it isn't as fast, neither can detect as many threats (threats, not false positives ) as NOD32 2.7.

but you don't really need antivirus actually, if you play it safe

Yes, I'm of course also careful with what I run and a heavy Sandboxie user.

[pi_1st]

i really think it is better to always use the latest version, for all software i believe

when ever i look at the change log or the update revision for some application it is really surprised me why does the release could even pass the QA person

[anon]

I partly agree with that - it is good, but that's not always. Just look at Winamp and all the people that stayed with v2.95 because v5 was too bloated and slow, for example. I have personally stuck with OPv4 because it has basically the same features as OP2008 (or reversed) while the UI is way more straightforward and minimalist - I think v2008 is more newbie-destined, with its Vista-like window style or "advanced options". Or perhaps it's just that I have been using v4 for too long to change it by now