View Full Version : Hub problems with 8.2

01-28-2005, 09:33 AM
When I start LW Modeler and start Layout from Modeler with Hub connection(F!2) Layout doesn´t load my additional menus or layout configs.
Even better, the only motion modifiers left are the lscript ones.
The same for Modeler when started from Layout(F12).
It does´t happen when Layout and Modeler are started seperately, both connected to the Hub, but not started from each other(via Hub).
Anyone has the same problems?
Doesn´t the new Hub in 8.2 recognize config files?

01-28-2005, 11:15 AM
yes i have this problem as well

02-03-2005, 07:40 PM
When I start Lightwave (not using F12, just starting it normally) it displays Connecting to Hub... and never starts. When I start Modeler 8.2, it locks up.

02-04-2005, 07:14 AM

Sounds like you may have a firewall blocking the hub. If you have one, try disabling it, and see if the problem goes away.

Librarian and hunter,

If you haven't already, please post this with steps in the Bug Workshop: LightWave 8.2 (http://vbulletin.newtek.com/showthread.php?t=32741) thread.

02-07-2005, 06:37 PM
Yes, everything worked when I uninstalled Zonealarm. I reinstalled it later, and Lightwave and modeler ran fine with Zonealarm after I allowed Newtek's programs to connect to the internet and run as servers. Also, Norton Antivirus suspects that it might be a worm, so I had to tell Norton to allow it.

02-07-2005, 06:51 PM
Do Personal Firewalls improve security? No.

Better: Configuring NT-services more securely

Remote Shell through activated "Personal Firewall":

from theabove article also a sentence about performance:
"An activated Norton Personal Firewall 2005 used in our test so many resources, that a download of a 100MB file to our Test-PC took more than the double time than with deactivated "Personal Firewall".

02-08-2005, 01:14 PM
Taken from above link:

Do Personal Firewalls improve security?

Why do so many people install them, then?

Because those people are all idiots.

I hardly needed to read the rest of it :D I did, but I didn't change my mind.

02-09-2005, 07:49 PM
The author may appear to you as SelfRighteousGeek, but at least he knows what he's talking about

"If you are nosy, you can look at my Advogato Page."

Current News:

February 8, 2005, Symantec UPX Parsing Engine Heap Overflow

02-09-2005, 09:28 PM
-- Quote --
Do Personal Firewalls improve security?
Why do so many people install them, then?
Because those people are all idiots.
-- Quote --

Or they just wanna know when something on their system trys to Get Out...

- Will.

02-10-2005, 12:43 AM
Or they just wanna know when something on their system trys to Get Out...

When "something" wants to get out of your system, your security concept has already failed, it's too late. A PFW will not stop intelligent malware from doing that.

02-10-2005, 05:15 AM
Also from above link:

If you seriously want to improve security on your machine, you have to reduce the code size, not increase it! And no matter how much software you remove, as long as you don't have the source code for the rest, you are still not even remotely secure. Consider dropping Windows and switching to a more secure operating system.

The solution for not understanding your operating system is to switch to another operating system you don't understand :D

Presumably he has a particular "favourite" in mind..... ;) wonder what that could be :D I love elitists, they have no sense of humour and so you can poke & prod them at will, for however long you want, and they never catch on.

"I see the Trojans have built another horse"

"Right. I suggest knocking the walls down around the city, the existence of the horse is proof we don't need them."


02-11-2005, 12:01 AM
If you feel safer with a PFW then use it... not my problem, but then don't complain Program X doesn't work as expexted...

To get back on topic:
The problem with the Hub is it listenes on all adapters so if you allow it in your Firewall config to "Connect to the internet" you are open to at least a DoS Attack, if not more (Buffer Overflow).

Every Programm that opens a listening socket should have an option to specify the adapter it should be bound to....