OpenDNS blocked almost one million phishing attempts in July.

Nice!

I've said it before, but it bears repeating. The OpenDNS servers are almost certainly faster, safer, and more reliable than those from your ISP. And it puts web filtering under your control.

I have used OpenDNS for a couple of years now, with nary a problem. It is free, and compatible with all browsers and operating systems. I see no downside to using it, and highly recommend it.

I just set up Open DNS following ky331's instructions.  I set this up through my router. I had no problems with this step.

I also downloaded the Open DNS-Updater-2.2.1.  When I open this I need to "Configure a network" and then "Select a Network."  I am totally lost on this part.   

Under Network to date it says "No dynamic network." I do not know what steps to take to configure a network.

Annie,

did you customize any filtering settings to block various categories of subject matter (via the "dashboard")??? ---

the updater and network selection/configuration are only needed if you have customized filtering.  

If you want only "basic" openDNS, without customized content filtering [or if you opted for the "family shield"], then you don't need to do anything more.

Maybe something here will help:
http://www.opendns.com/support/dynamic_ip_windows/

I'm not sure you need the Updater. I have it, but have not needed to use it.

Let see, one million attempts and several million users of Open Dns,  equal less than one attempt per user per month.  As you can probably guess, I am not big multiple security products.  I use but one.  It like the old comment, "The most dangerous part of a car is the nut holding the wheel."   Every year or so, I run some thid-party scans as a check, nothing is ever found. 

Michael:

What can I say? I use seat belts and haven't disabled my car's air bags either, though neither have ever saved my life yet.

Similarly, it has been many years since any of my security programs have detected anything. Should I therefore dump them? It's a valid question, which weighs costs versus benefits.

I would submit that the costs of security programs are minimal. Excellent free anti-virus, anti-malware, and software firewalls are available; I often wonder why folks pay for these. The only (one-time) cost I fully endorse is the purchase of a NAT-enabled router, for its hardware firewall, and this is a modest expense.

There is also the potential of these programs to slow down your system. Some of the security suites have done this in the past, but frankly on modern systems I don't see this as a significant issue.

Passive security programs such as a Hosts File or SpywareBlaster, exact no system performance penalty. And OpenDNS is faster than ISP servers (quite apart from its filter/security function). On-demand 3rd party scanners likewise extract no performance penalty.

The benefits of these security programs are like insurance. You don't need them til you need them. The malware removal forums are filled with folks who needed them.

I appreciate that you have expertise beyond the average user here. And I have no doubt that one can have too many security programs installed, working at cross purposes. But I do take exception to your oft repeated negative perception of security programs in general.

I truly think it a wrong signal to send.

From the Wikipedia "As of March 2010 OpenDNS handles over 20 billion DNS requests daily, with over 26 billion being delivered on 21 April, 2010" therefore blocking one million phishing attacks is meaningless.  Further "phishing" should not be decided by committee.  I do not need or want anyone deciding, what sites I should go to.  Lastly, if I type an invalid URL, I want a “404” message not a search page.   You do realize that the search page is how they make money!

I do indeed realise how OpenDNS makes money. I rarely type invalid URLs.

But you dodge my more general questions.

Thanks Joe53,  I do not want any of the custom settings. So I probably do not need the updater program.  I Did finally figure everthing out--got the updater working. Thanks for the additonal information. 

Mike,

you have an uncanny way of always seeing the glass as half empty.   It seems that every time I (or Joe) offer a program which we believe can help the community "at large", you feel compelled to offer a stinging dissent.

I concur fully with Joe, that you're sending the wrong signal to the average user.

For the expert... and we're not trying to take that status away from you... you can most likely get by with a minimalistic security configuration, by trusting yourself --- "the driver" --- to handle everything.   But most people just can't handle that.   We WANT to have seat belts --- if only for a perceived "peace-of-mind". 

And even experts can make costly mistakes (typos) at times.

That's why I believe it safer for me... and most users... you being an exception... to have multiple/redundant layers of security programs --- provided they don't noticeably impact the speed of the system, nor my productivity.

for phishing, I in fact have two or three layers of protection.   First, OpenDNS which we're discussing in this thread.   Second, WOT (Web Of Trust) add-on in both IE and Firefox.   Third, IE8's SmartScreen filter.  [Perhaps Firefox and Opera have their own additional filtering, but I don't recall off the top of my head.]  Overkill?   I'm sure you'd say YES!   But I figure, better safe than sorry.   As BB often says, "a belt, together with suspenders".   It can't hurt you to use both.

Keep in mind that phishing protection isn't the only point of OpenDNS and WOT.   In fact, it's really a secondary (or tertiary) side-benefit of each.   Each of these programs offer several benefits, for free, and I for one am glad to be able to use them all.

No one is forcing OpenDNS, WOT, nor any other program suggested here on you... nor on anyone else.   If you want to disable all phishing protection, by not using OpenDNS, nor WOT, nor IE8's SmartScreen filter, then that's your right... feel free to do so.  And if you prefer to get a "404 message" rather than being offered a potentially helpful list of sites which you might have been intending to reach, again, that's your choice.

I (and Joe) choose to take an alternative approach.   The bottom line being, it's a choice... an OPINION... which cannot be right nor wrong in any absolute sense.   I hope in the future we can simply "agree to disagree quietly" on matters of opinion.   Please allow us to offer what we believe can be helpful to the average user, without jumping on us... rather, please just ignore us, so we can all live peacefully in our separate worlds.   (However, if we make any factual errors, then feel free to correct us.)

After being a member of these forums for 9 years, and having witnessed many of Michael's negative posts, I can see no benefit from them to myself or other ordinary users. He seems to be at odds with the collective and common sense wisdom of those I consider  to be knowledgeabe and experienced in security products and problems. I believe that the interests of the majority of forum users would be best served if Michael would just do as David suggests and just stay away or "agree to disagree quietly"

ky331, Thanks for the further instructions. It looks like I am all good now.

", I in fact have two or three layers of protection.   First, OpenDNS which we're discussing in this thread.   Second, WOT (Web Of Trust) add-on in both IE and Firefox.   Third, IE8's SmartScreen filter.  [Perhaps Firefox and Opera have their own additional filtering, but I don't recall off the top of my head.]  Overkill?   I'm sure you'd say YES!   But I figure, better safe than sorry.   As BB often says, "a belt, together with suspenders".   It can't hurt you to use both."

I have Open DNS, WOT, and have enabled IE8's Smart Screen Filter.  I thank both you and Joe again for your help and advice which I have always found to be 'Spot on." 

Annie

Yes, I don't agree, so what.  I have been respectful, no name calling, no personal attacks.  What some want is a monolithic position about this topic, “My Way or the Highway.”  The users should be able to see all sides and then come to their own conclusions.  I prefer to use facts to support my positions, as an example OPENDns resolves over 20,000,000,000 addresses a day, that is 600,000,000,000 addresses a month.  They stop 1,000,000 phishing attempts a month.  That is 1.666666666666667e-4 percent.

Let me close with this - I ain't going away.  When is see what I believe is wrong and I have some factual support I will post.

What is next; try to ban me as a heretic?

Take it for what it's worth (love it, or hate it, as you see fit):

NY Times article on OpenDNS: Simplifying The Lives Of Web Users

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/19/technology/personaltech/19pogue.html?_r=1