Proving to myself that IWE isn't worth reading, I stumbled across [link|http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/02/12/16/021216opwinman.xml|Putting\r\nXP in the zone], which I could only assume was more laudation about how XP\r\nwas enterprise-ready and the best thing since sliced yoghurt....

\r\n\r\n
\r\n

[R]eaders are, well, alarmed that the firewall's default\r\nconfiguration allows components of Windows XP to silently connect with\r\nMicrosoft's servers without displaying an alert. One reader installed\r\nZoneAlarm to augment XP's weaker, built-in firewall, removed all named\r\nprograms and components from ZoneAlarm's OK list, and then rebooted. But\r\nXP could still contact the mother ship.

\r\n\r\n

This is a concern because Microsoft added numerous features to XP\r\nthat report information about you or your activities to centralized\r\ndatabases. I wrote four months ago that XP contains a dozen or so\r\ncomponents that automatically connect to the Internet (See "[link|http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/02/08/26/020826opwinman.xml|Sneaky\r\nservice packs]"). Microsoft describes 11 of these programs in a white\r\npaper that's available at [link|http://www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/pro/techinfo/administration/manageautoupdate|www.microsoft.com/WindowsXP/pro/techinfo/administration/manageautoupdate].

\r\n
\r\n\r\n

A couple of lessons there, among them that you can't trust Microsoft\r\nor ZoneAlarm. And if XP can phone the mothership, it can\r\ncertainly kick packets to the Forbidden City. IWE may be worth the\r\noccasional perusal though

\r\n