Whats the best firewall?
Posted 11 November 2002 - 11:29 AM
Posted 11 November 2002 - 11:55 AM
• It passes all tests at grc.com (Nanoprobe and Leaktest)
• It passes all tests at pcflank.com
• It shows detailed information of current applications and processes accessing the net and their speed, bit similar to what netstat in command prompt does.
• Its not bloated
• It works 100% with ICS, which ZoneAlarm intereferes in often.
I moved away from ZoneAlarm since they reached version 3, which they re-designed the GUI on it, making it harder to reach the advanced options.
Posted 11 November 2002 - 01:05 PM
Tinker, on Nov 11 2002, 01:46 PM, said:
Norton's Internet Security 2002...does it use alot of resources? have you put it to a port scan?
This info is vitial to the thread, thanks
Posted 11 November 2002 - 01:20 PM
its just as easy to use as zone alarm without running an application in the back ground like Za does. i found with Za that the "true vector" part of the program would block some ports even when firewall was turned off, and true vector would load with the pc no matter what. it made hosting games a real headache.
on aarons sugestion i tried KERIO and ive never looked back, i love how you can save your rules to file then import them again in case of a format or something, very handy little feature that.
Its free for home use like Za also, and its not as annoying, where as Za is "noisy at first then quietens down" KERIO is noisy at first then it shuts the hell up, fullstop. it wont bug you with stupid warning everytime it blocks some spammers Windows messenger packet or something, it just blocks it and leaves you alone.
Posted 11 November 2002 - 07:01 PM
And if you are on DSL or some other means, wouldn't deploying a router make more sense then a firewall software? or, do some of you employ both?
Inquiring minds want to know w00t
Posted 11 November 2002 - 08:53 PM
But if people want in softfirewall or not...they will get in...just depends on how bad they want it....
Posted 11 November 2002 - 10:40 PM
Hash..this is exactly what I was thinking. I didn't orginally think about NAT being so powerful but after getting a wireless network and installing Norton Internet Security 2002, I never get an attack. Not once. I have had to go into configuration and open ports from time to time for the donkey but otherwise everything works. Norton has been very non-intrusive for me. It asks and has s good feature to automatically configure an app with logical settings. I think that even with a NAT you need a software firewall just because some of the progs that you run like to sneak onto the internet to get spyware and crap like that. Also, Norton Internet Security has a great add blocking feature. I also arm with Adaware Pro with the little watcher that detects spyware and bad cookies immediately. I never have probs. Also, Norton Antivirus has not let anything slip through as of date...can't say the same for Mcafee.
The reason I go beyond the firewall is because you gotta get the whole arsenal out if you really want to guarantee no intrusions.
Posted 12 November 2002 - 09:03 AM
Tinker, on Nov 11 2002, 05:24 PM, said:
I am not for sure what you mean by port scan Chris..
theres several out there, heres one I use alot
it checks to make sure your ports are protected by the firewall your using
Posted 12 November 2002 - 09:06 AM
Doggie, on Nov 11 2002, 11:21 PM, said:
[XP FIREWALL GUIDE] source: axcel216