Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Best free firewall for Windows?

<< < (42/53) > >>

Dirhael:
Even more interesting. Could you elaborate? Thx. :)
-40hz (July 27, 2008, 11:45 PM)
--- End quote ---

Looks like cthorpe beat me to it :D

40hz:
Even more interesting. Could you elaborate? Thx. :)
-40hz (July 27, 2008, 11:45 PM)
--- End quote ---

Looks like cthorpe beat me to it :D
-Dirhael (July 28, 2008, 06:21 AM)
--- End quote ---

Thankee Gentlemen. Looks like I've got some more reading to do. :read:

Also appreciate the heads-up on System Safety Monitor. I usually run with HIPS turned off unless I'm doing something where I think I might need the additional layer of protection. But if there is a workable HIPS solution that is lighter on system resources than what I have, I'm all for it. Gonna have to buy me a copy and check it out.

Thanks again. :)

f0dder:
Any security system that can be terminated without authorization is no security system at all. I really don't see how anyone can seriously advance the argument that it's not the responsibility of a security product to protect itself.
--- End quote ---
As soon as you have malware running on your system, you're game over. If a HIPS/firewall/antivirus solution can't keep stuff from coming in, forget about it. And yes, I believe that outbound filtering by software firewalls is basically useless.

HIPS may be yet another case of "putting lipstick on the pig," but until somebody in Redmond decides to audit and (potentially) rewrite something like 50+ million lines of source code, I'd like to have all options available.
--- End quote ---
Bullocks - NT is safe. You just need to run as a limited account instead of having admin privileges. Yes, this can be a pain because of how the non-kernel components of NT are done, but just drop your rights for internet-facing stuff, then.

At least NT has proper fine-grained permissions, unlike the owner/group/world crap from the *U*X mentality :)

40hz:
As soon as you have malware running on your system, you're game over. If a HIPS/firewall/antivirus solution can't keep stuff from coming in, forget about it.
--- End quote ---

Isn't that why it would make sense to have HIPS active during an install?

At least NT has proper fine-grained permissions, unlike the owner/group/world crap from the *U*X mentality smiley
--- End quote ---

Hmmm....are you Tux baiting? ;D

f0dder:
Isn't that why it would make sense to have HIPS active during an install?
--- End quote ---
Yep, just don't get too caught up on the issue of whether there's outbound filtering or not, and whether the application can be auto-terminated or nto :). IMHO power-users shouldn't really need anything but a NATing router and windows built-in firewall (in case you have a friend visiting you with an infected computer), but for the less techy (and more click-bloody-anything naïve), and corporate certification-hungry needs, it's of course another scenario.

At least NT has proper fine-grained permissions, unlike the owner/group/world crap from the *U*X mentality smiley
--- End quote ---
Hmmm....are you Tux baiting? :P
--- End quote ---
A bit :) - the NT kernel is (mostly) a pretty fine piece of work, and it's ACL security model is nice and flexible. The problem lies with the non-kernel part of the system ;)

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page