Firewalls - Any Advice?

[Hatred]

The laptop itself is old not the operating system (it only just meets the requirments for xp) so i guess i'll be fine. Thanks for the advice.

[tashi]

(it only just meets the requirments for xp)

Which Service Pack do you have on XP?

[Hatred]

Which Service Pack do you have on XP?

I updated recently so i have service pack 3. Something else i notice when looking at the system properties is that it has xp professional not the home kind.

[bitman]

Is it worth me getting a firewall? I am using a very old and there for slow laptop so i need to have as few things running as possible. I never thought i needed a firewall before because the site that recommended spybot and avast said keeping them updated and scanning regularly would be enough.

I am in the same situation with an old PII 400MHz Windows 2000 desktop behind a hardware firewall, and in fact I use exactly the same combination of Avast! and Spybot S&D on that PC. You are even better off since you've got Windows XP.

Since Avast! includes several modules including a 'Network Shield', it monitors some of the same things that many personal firewall's do.

Network Shield
A new resident protection module was added to avast! 4.5: the Network Shield. This module provides protection against known Internet worms/attacks. It analyzes all network traffic and scans for malicious content. It can be viewed as a lightweight firewall (or, more precisely, an IDS (Intrusion Detection System)).

The Network Shield is only available on NT-based systems (Windows NT/2000/XP/Vista).

Though this isn't exactly the same thing, you are correct that having Windows XP SP3 properly patched, with the Avast! AntiVirus and Spybot S&D are quite good protection. The really important thing is keeping all of your updates (Windows & Anti-Malware) current and understanding how your Anti-Malware programs work.

You already have the Windows firewall to protect from direct inbound attacks, so this along with the Avast! shields is sufficient to keep you protected and informed.

Bitman

[Hatred]

Thats good to know because i tried installing comodo and got a message along the lines of 'not a valid win32 apllication (or it could have been process - i don't know). Did a little research and that may be because i need to turn off the security thats running but either way i want virtumonde gone first.

[Samoth]

129260
Senior Member

said :

I am learning just like everyone else"
Windows XP home sp3 2.50 ghz processor,760 Mb Ram. spybot version 1.6 final edition.
Latest teatimer, IE resident active.
welcome new members!!

Thanks! Just a qestion so you use spybot and ZA - I too - and I have AVG AV 8.0 free and I thinking about instaling Trojan Hunter 5.0 alongside - what is your opinion: I heart that different security devices ( resident shields ) hinder each other - is this so or do they deliver more security together ? Samoth

[drragostea]

Samoth welcome.
To me TrojanHunter and it's subscription price is a bit not average. You might want to read it's site analysis from McAfee SiteAdvisor... (Although WOT [Web of Trust] came back clean):
http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/mis...false&aff_id=0
-
TeaTimer, AVG, and ZA should co-exist with no problems. Well, it might also depend on what version of ZA you have (Pro, Internet Security). One AV and one anti-malware Resident Shields make a good configuration, so it's fine.

[al5579]

Hmm, interesting debate on firewalls here. I currently have the latest version of Online Armor Free. I downloaded this after I read the firewall test report on matousec.com and seeing the overall rating. It indicates a high overall rating. I used to have the free version of ZoneAlarm. In fact, it was the first firewall I used. But now I'm having some second thoughts about Online Armor because it blocked Kaspersky's Online Scanner without even asking me and this was the first time that I used the scanner. I'm thinking about getting ZoneAlarm again. I felt pretty safe with it, probably because it kept statistics on blocked intrusions and maybe because it had more details on what was blocked. ZoneAlarm was rated lower than Online Armor though. I felt safe with ZoneAlarm but the firewall test results says Online Armor ranks better and yet I feel not as safe when I had ZoneAlarm (I'm guessing due to Online Armor having less features).

Should I get ZoneAlarm again or it is nostalgia that's affecting my judgment?

[drragostea]

It would depend on the user's perspective. In my opinion, there is no one "perfect" firewall. Each firewall has it's own special strengths. I was just discussing the other day in another forum and a member told me that it is well the firewall is that allows and blocks things going in and how, that is it's strength.

Some members, say that ZoneAlarm is a cardboard box just like Windows Firewall, and some people say ZoneAlarm is very good. I can't give my opinion because I have not used ZoneAlarm in quite some time.

You should (in my opinion) to evaluate it's features (special features like spyware and virus protection in ZA Pro) to see for yourself if ZA is good or bad.

Each person's opinions differs.
Good luck.

[bitman]

The simple reason there is so much 'opinion' involved is that the real issue for most people has nothing to do with the firewall capabilities themselves. In fact, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the Windows firewall if that's all you are really attempting to acquire.

The problem comes in when unknowledgeable users are involved, such as children or in fact most users. The reality is that what most people identify as a 'firewall' is actually a mild form of an IDS (Intrusion Detection System) or in the least a dynamic configuration system.

In skilled hands, the Windows Vista firewall may be configured in minutes to be as secure as any third-party firewall. However, most users today are completely unable to perform such a relatively simple configuration, primarily because they have absolutely no real computer training, which really isn't surprising.

So the first decision in selecting a firewall is what are you attempting to accomplish? Do you actually want a simple firewall with other applications to perform the more sophisticated protection or do you prefer that the firewall be an active part of that protection and act as a dynamic configuration system (for outbound) maybe with additional IDS capabilities on top of that?

As drragostea mentioned, this is where opinion enters the decision, which is why there are often arguments that no one ever 'wins'. However, the decision itself is really rather simple, because highly complex applications never work well in the hands of unskilled users. So if children or other non-technical users are involved with the PC, use the KISS principle (Keep It Simple Stupid). Otherwise, decide how technically knowledgeable you wish to become and pick your firewall based on the criteria you choose to investigate.

Though I'm highly technical and have spent years in the IT field, I've found that the more complex systems tend to most easily confuse, so the KISS principal usually applies for everyone at some point. It's just when they finally get tired of spending most of their time managing their protection rather than using the computer for the reasons they originally bought it.

Bitman