I didn't state Registry tweaking stealthed ports. I stated it made my PC more secure(hardened). As for only a firewall stealthing ports, that's not necessarily true. ANY connectivity device that stops these scans from connecting to a PC or returning that info might generate the stealth response from GRC's Shields UP. It depends upon the program used to conduct the scans(and protocols).
I used Nessus against a LAN I set up in a lab. I was comparing Cisco routers with ACLs(ingress/egress filtering) against ZAPRO on a LAN host and Nessus returned the same results('No Vulnerability Found') as it was unable to conduct scans remotely against the LAN. Another example, fping, will only state the target IP is 'unreachable'. nmap uses terms like 'filtered' and 'Unfiltered'. I guess its up to the developers of these programs what terms they use.
As for my port scan result being lopsided, no, the IP was my IP, trust me. As for it not being a true scan of my PC, that's true but neither was the image you presented. In order for me to prove my point, that the Registry tweaks(2) that I gave actually closed port 135, the scans from GRC would have to make it to my PC and return unblocked for each port. Ditto for yours. Since that's not going to happen, neither of us can interpret these images for the stealthed ports on what the port status would be.
However, I would bet that port 135 would be closed as it doesn't show up in port mappers like netstat and OpenPorts and CurrPorts.
Hope this clarifies my position.
Message Edited by WATCHER on 01-25-2008 06:41 PM