I've got a couple of new unused USB Speedtouch modems as supplied by BT cluttering up my back
room. As it happens, I have a requirement for a plain ADSL modem to attach to a W2k3 server. I
was thinking about buying a PCI one, but perhaps I could use one of these?

The only thing is, I have an idea that they have a bad rep. So.. how bad are they? Should I buy
something else and just put these 2 on Ebay? Or straight in the skip?

Thanks in advance!

[snip]
Everyone seems to use them so that can't be all bad. They're also cheap
(look at eBay) so it may not be worth the hassle of you listing them!

The main reason people don't like them (and this is true of all USB ADSL
modems) is that many users connect their PCs directly to ADSL without
installing firewall, anti-virus, anti-spyware software and then - bang, your
PC is infected before you even know what's hit you! An
ADSL/router/(optional) wireless access point allows the creation of a more
secure network if only because the routers can be preconfigured to block all
ports before you plug in the ADSL.

But not that you're warned, and can add all this to your PC _BEFORE_
installing the modem, you should be OK ;-).

Paul DS.

I would use a router and try selling the modems. <fx>I am sure the modems
are very usefull and someone really needs them. It's just not your style, is
it now? </fx>

Infant Newbie

"John Carlyle-Clarke" <john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Xns9615745E68F5Ejohncceuroplacercouk@194.168. 222.122...

"Paul D.Smith" <paul_d_smith@x-hotmail.com> wrote in
news:42304032$0$10945$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex. net:

In this case, the Windows 2003 server would be the firewall & router.
Network wide AV is installed already.

I do have an ADSL/router/802.11g box, but there is now a requirement
for external VPN access and this unit just won't do it. So I have two
choices: either buy a very expensive router with built-in VPN, or
connect the server straight to the ADSL. The second is much cheaper
The router will be relegated to wireless AP duties only.

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 12:40:16 -0000, "Paul D.Smith"
<paul_d_smith@x-hotmail.com> wrote:

everyone uses them because they're the one a lot of ISPs give away
free.

this may be linked to a) the above and b) the quality !!


Well, its A reason. USB is also much less stable than ethernet, and
requires much more processor power & memory on your PC.

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 14:13:01 GMT, "John Carlyle-Clarke"
<john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote:

I'd pretty much disrecommend plugging a USB modem directly into a
server, unless you plan firewalling that server off from the rest of
your network.

There /are/ some cheap routers around that do VPN. My £80 USR unit
claims to support it.

Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote in news:ado031t3r2kivrgkrlmfvb4rm4hige80r1
@4ax.com:

How does this compare to PCI modems?

Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote in news:itr031lnaccvqvut9cf15clg3pn1b3isi6@
4ax.com:

I assume you mean you disrecommend plugging _any_ modem directly... etc. ?

I see your point, but the MS SBS 2003 includes firewalling etc, and this is certainly one of the
recommended MS ways of setting it up.

I'm not sure if this is a case of MS preferring convenience over security .. but surely they've learned
their lesson?

I did ask around a little because what you said is the accepted wisdom - but most people I asked
said it was fine.

So does this 3Com, to some extent. Does your router actually support VPN termination, or just pass
it through? Does it support L2TP & IPSec, or just PPTP? Does it support multiple sessions, or just 1
(or some other arbitrary small number)?

It's when you get into these questions that you find the cheap home/SOHO units fall down because
they are just not made with this in mind, and you probably can't even get answers. That I suppose is
why 3Com home/SOHO units are 70 quid and their business units are 400 quid.

"John Carlyle-Clarke" john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk wrote in message
news:Xns9615910CF89D8johncceuroplacercouk@194.168. 222.121
Or option 3: configure your router to do VPN passthrough to the VPN server?

S'what I do so I can VPN to the kids PC to fix their games when I'm away
from home

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:51:14 GMT, "John Carlyle-Clarke"
<john.cc@nospam.europlacer.co.uk> wrote:

yes!

I suspect you can guess my opinion on that. Bearing in mind the vast
number of exploits found in various other s/w, and that MS aren't a
specialist firewall builder.

VPN passthru, l2tp, pptp and IPSec.

If you've a dozen users, a 400 quid router is costing your company 11
quid per annum per user. This doesn't seem an unreasonable price to
pay for a much more secure system.

Mark McIntyre <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote in
<g0c13117lkh430rh02sb0sqdhag7ge0dt6@4ax.com>:

Point taken on the security front. There is one other possible problem.
The connections don't seem to work if both client and server are behind NAT
routers. Given that many home broadband users have one of these now, this
could be a problem. If I wasn't to connect the server direct to the big bad
Net, this would mean getting a router that could actually terminate VPN
connections, which I think means the more expensive ones. I agree on your
cost argument though - just trying to keep costs down where possible.

Thanks for all the input - much appreciated.

On 10 Mar 2005 23:48:22 GMT, jpcc@removethis.bigfoot.com (John
Carlyle-Clarke) wrote:

If you think about it, if the client's router doesn't support VPN
passthru, then what you do at your end is not going to help! I think
thats the point about a broadband router such as mine (which is just
an off-the-shelf consumer unit available in PCWorld etc).

I'm not sure - presumably you're running a VPN server on the box, so
VPN passthru would presumably work. However I'm no expert on the
server end of this, so I may be talking billhooks.