I’ve granted svchost.exe access to download.windowsupdate.com by specifying this host name. Later and in spite of this, I was asked whether to allow svchost access to a certain IP. Using nslookup, the IP resolves to download.windowsupdate.com. I was wondering why I’m being asked because there is already a matching rule. Why is it?
So, does the FW store the 8.* IPs internally? Later, they do not match the 2.* IPs, and, consequently, the rule doesn’t match? How can we solve this issue?
Comodo takes the lowest IPv4 address and highest IPv4 address that a host name resolves to and uses that range to base the rule on. For example if I created a block rule for yahoo.com the registry entry where the rule is saved looks like this: AddrStart 98.138.253.109 AddrEnd 206.190.36.45 if we do a DNS lookup of yahoo.com you get this:
so every IPv4 address within 98.138.253.109 - 206.190.36.45 will be blocked even if it doesn't belong to yahoo.com and if yahoo.com ever resolves to an IP address outside that range then it will be allowed. Using a rule based on a host name is generally not a good idea.
Thanks futuretech for this helpful piece of information. Sorry, I wasn’t able to find it before.
Yes, using a host name is not a good idea. However, specifiying IP addresses is not possible in this case. (svchost is a beast anyway…)
Thanks, this cleared things up