Over the last few weeks i have been using the built in windows vista 64 bit firewall and windows defender for spyware. I have been using nod32 antivirus with no problems. Well the xp firewall was never anygood and am worried that vista's firewall is just as bad as the xp one. What does everyone else use.
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Firewall selection
- Thread starter voyagerxp
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2006
- Location
- Earth
I would use comodo firewall. i love it it even has leak tests to see how strong your firewall is.
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2006
- Location
- OKC
a smoothwall or ipcop machine... the only way to fly now
- Joined
- May 22, 2005
- Location
- NY
Unless you really need an outbound filtering firewall, the Vista firewall is perfectly safe. I really wish people wouldn't bash it so much just because it doesn't have outbound filtering. I really don't care about outbound filtering. It isn't something I care for and it really doesn't help security IMO. As far as I'm concerned, once something is on my system, it's over. How can I really trust a software outbound filtering firewall running on an infected machine? How do I know it just didn't add itself to the allow list? How do I know it isn't disguising itself as another process? The sad truth is you really can't.
Don't go with an outbound filtering firewall just because you hear the Vista firewall isn't secure enough. Also, I think everybody would agree that you should have a hardware firewall such as a router. Having a separate rig specifically used for a firewall is definitely an option too. Also, since it would be an outbound filtering firewall on the edge of your network rather then on an infected machine, it would actually provide you with security benefits. This way the infecton can't really interfere with the firewall.
Either way you should have a software firewall and a hardware one, especially if you have other computers set up within your network. What kind of software or hardware firewall solution you end up with is really up to you.
Don't go with an outbound filtering firewall just because you hear the Vista firewall isn't secure enough. Also, I think everybody would agree that you should have a hardware firewall such as a router. Having a separate rig specifically used for a firewall is definitely an option too. Also, since it would be an outbound filtering firewall on the edge of your network rather then on an infected machine, it would actually provide you with security benefits. This way the infecton can't really interfere with the firewall.
Either way you should have a software firewall and a hardware one, especially if you have other computers set up within your network. What kind of software or hardware firewall solution you end up with is really up to you.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2001
- Location
- the Netherlands
The XP SP2 firewall is already pretty ok! There was a review online where they hooked up a clean install of Windows XP, XP SP1 and XP SP2 directly onto the internet without a router/HWfirewall and both XP and XP SP1 were infected in like 20 min. SP2 turns it's firewall on by default and fiters at least inbound. So the Vista firewall must be at least slightly better. I would turn on the hardware firewall in your router and not worry too much. If you have old parts around (Pentium I mmx or better) it would be nice project to build a smoothwall...
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2004
Harware firewalls kick software firewalls touche's. That is why a dedicated firewall box is one of the best solutions. Also why a router is a dedicated firewall box in itself, just dinky ( and limited).voyagerxp said:
Running a Linux box is one of the stornger solutions, since it actually gives loads more control over simple router firmware. Geeks just love having an extra older box running a firewall. The average user gets by with a NAT firewall. Plus it is esier to get going.
- Joined
- May 30, 2004
BrutalDrew said:
Vistas firewall does outbound filtering, Xps does not. Both firewalls are fine. If you have issues with malware leaving your box, it's already owned by someone else, and a software firewall isn't likely to stop it. I use the stock firewall in both my XP and Vista partitions and they work fine. I used to use Sygate when I was on 56k because I played UT2k4 on that connection and couldn't afford to have apps checking for updates and stuff. Now that I'm on cable I've got the bandwidth to spare so that isn't a concern. Your best defense against malware is using a limited account, and having up to date virus software. A 3rd party firewall is almost useless for security(excepting a router or sandbox).
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2004
- Location
- New Hampshire
if you can buy one, go with outpost or sunbelt. After that komodo. Vista firewall is much better than the xp one but not as good as the 3rd party ones.
- Joined
- May 22, 2005
- Location
- NY
I didn't know that, thanks for letting me know.
I completely agree and this is the main reason I never ran an outbound filtering firewall in XP.
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2004
- Location
- Smoky Mountains, NC
/\Outbond helps though as it lets you know what is going on. I have seen it many times myself where I will get a virus or program like it and my firewall catches it when it tries to connect to the internet, from there of course I remove it. After using ZoneAlarm for 3-5 years I grew pretty tired of it, right now I am using Comodo and personally am really liking it, won't say it's the best though as I have not tried them all.
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Location
- Where angels carry savage weapons
BrutalDrew said:
I completely disagree with that. If something gets on your system, and your antivirus fails to detect it, and software firewall with outbound filtering will be the only way you'll know you've downloaded something you shouldn't have. Perhaps the other way you'll find out is when you get your next bank statement, or you notice your passwords have been compromised. Outbound filtering will most likely prevent packets containing personal information collected by a virus from leaving your computer.
But I do agree with you that the system is already compromised, even though the virus hasn't compromised the firewall. I personally wouldn't take any chances, and just format immediately. Software firewalls are not something to put blind faith in, but you won't see me run a system that doesn't have one. I definitively don't think they are a waste of memory or anything. If only you see how many applications, that don't require internet access, attempt to phone home.
Anyways, the best software firewall I've seen, and what I currently use, is Sunbelt Kerio PF. The full version has host-based intrusion prevention, which is another thing that will let you when your AV has failed you.
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2005
- Location
- Tau'ri
BrutalDrew said:
Actually both XP sp2 and Vista Firewall have outbound filtering
So thats not a valid argument anymore HArdware firewalls are great.. .problem is
a) unless its a firewall router it requires another PC running
b) if it is a built in a gateay/router, its a set it forget it unit no ip filtering or anything
Still I like NAT routing/ HW firewall and a software firewall as a network monitor
Vista firewall is fine if you disable exceptions and arent running a bank on your machine... I torrent so ALLOW a lot of remote PCs to connect to my machine, so I like sygate personal firewall. On XP its the ****. Has a great logging/ backtracing utility built in. If you want a sandbagging utility then nothing beats Tiny firewall for a software firewall. Its not just a "internet" based firewall its for hardcore users only though. (unless you just accept everything). Sandbagging, means it sepeartes the application from the core system, like UAC does in Vista. But requires a LOT more prompting. Instead of setting "allow" once when installing an app, it requires an acceptance prompt anytime it wants to access a new FOLDER. Crazy
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2007
- Location
- Poulsbo, Washington
Comodo all the way. Comodo has proven to me that it is reliable and safe and easy to use. The only problem with comodo is that every time something is trying to access the internet, it pops up a window saying Allow or Deny. But Comodo, by far is the best out there for me anyway.
- Joined
- May 15, 2005
- Location
- French Mountains
yesvoyagerxp said:
i686
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2007
- Location
- Poulsbo, Washington
So Comodo Firewall was the cause of my problems. My Modem Driver was conflicting with Comodo and my PC would just randomly shut down I am using Zone Alarm right now and I LOVE IT. USE IT
Similar threads
