Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Firewalls - please, i can't be bothered.

<< < (11/17) > >>

f0dder:
iphigenie: you don't really need a perimeter firewall if you use NAT - of course you can think of NAT as a sort of firewall, but it isn't. Of course if you run some static mapped services or are corporate sized, a firewall and some intrusion detection is probably a good idea.

But you do make a good point (which I already mentioned :) ), even with a perimeter firewall (or NAT), you still need some per-host stuff... Windows Firewall from XP should handle the basics, and add antivirus ontop of that to protect less savvy users from themselves, and the rest of us from exploits :)

Carol Haynes:
A sad story, Carol.  :(

I think the answer is to be found in the settings.
-Curt (March 04, 2007, 09:51 AM)
--- End quote ---

That is the sad thing - each time it was installed I accepted the default 'easy' setup and usually accepted the default suggestions for known applications when they popped up. For others I either accepted or denied access to inbound or outbound access depending on what I thought of the app making the request.

This seems to me about as basic as it gets for using Outpost and yet version 4 continually BSODed even on fresh winodws installations on more than one system. I spent a long time in the early days of version 3 with BSODs too but they eventually disappeared when Agnitum finally produced a stable version.

I am sure the ideas behind Outpost are really good - I just really wish that Agnitum actually tested their software before making it live - instead they appear to run a live Beta program without telling anyone that is what they are doing. Not only do they charge for buggy new versions but they seem to move on to the next buggy version as soon as they manage to get the thing running stable. OK I could go back to the last build in version 3 which did work but I really got sick of being told it was time to upgrade to version 4 (and I couldn't see any way to turn off program updates without disabling all updating).

dk70:
True iphigenie, the guy I called Dr. Firewall certainly also promoted inbound firewall, router or Windows Firewall. He was defending the position of that being enough and for many people the better setup - as opposed to many security guides and well meaning forum posts claiming XP default is a risk to users, perhaps accompanied by link to a leak test as proof. Look around at a place like Wilders to get the idea but you see similar recommendations/warnings all over tech side of internet.

The layer thinking is nice, even MS says that is how you must look at security, but this advanced firewall demand should not be at top of list of things to do. Good practices and some awareness of being responsible for computers and own actions is way more important. Not like "attacks" come from out of the blue, sources/reasons are the same old. Many people still have not upgraded to SP2 and could not care less. Depends who you are. If every other layer including user behavior is in place I really dont see much of a need for outbound control. I see and recognize the need to tinker and feel in control etc. - why they temporarily have caught my interest.

Go crazy http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?p=351107 ;)

Btw, Im not so sure those fat do-it-all packages is a bad thing. I wouldnt mind one if I had that desire. Must be flexible and modular build of course. You see all the known companies trying to justify their AV, their Anti-Spyware, their Firewall - all with more and more features and yet melting together. Bundle make sense to me, also thinking of subscription fee! If well done package should be easier to install and maintain for most people. No compatibility issues should be guranteed. I dont think majority is willing to have an arsenal of security programs. Geeks will always prefer special programs, the not so popular but much better product.

f0dder:
Many people still have not upgraded to SP2 and could not care less.
-dk70 (March 04, 2007, 11:40 AM)
--- End quote ---
And if those people aren't behind a NAT, it's their own fault when they get hit by the same-old worm, and they shouldn't whine and bitch about security.

Curt:
That is the sad thing - each time it was installed I accepted the default 'easy' setup-Carol Haynes (March 04, 2007, 11:06 AM)
--- End quote ---

Your struggles are a mystery to me. Yes, I too have had struggles with Outpost, but after visiting Wilders forum always found the error to be some 20 inches in front of the screen. But that was my fault; I know you are a lot smarter than me when it comes to IT, and therefor I am even more puzzled by your bad experiences with Outpost.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page