Cable Forum
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Security & Virus Discussion (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=38)
-   -   XP firewall v. Zonealarm (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33602515)

AntiSilence 24-10-2006 10:34
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lauzjp (Post 34143389)
*confused* but put ZA back on anyway. its not doing no harm I guess... I had a thought though - what would've happened to the things that were in the virus vault when I uninstalled it? :disturbd:
But, hasn't ZA been identified as the culprit for stealing peoples bandwidth? :confused:

lauzjp 24-10-2006 10:56
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
it doesn't seem to make any difference to me tbh. I'm only browsing all day, and on emails... the only online gaming I do is on here and msn! ;)

Scarlett 24-10-2006 13:01
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
I paid for ZA security suite thingy for 2 computers and no real problems so far but we only surf and email really so they'res not much to go wrong. I like it for the fact that it check outgoing communications as well which could indicate that you have a virus/trogen on your system already.

cookie_365 24-10-2006 19:37
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sherer (Post 34143382)
yes definately.. the hardware router should give you greater protection than the software one as it will block ALL ports but the ones you open up.. however yu may open up P2P ports and general web traffic so you can still get virus' and adware etc on your machine so i alwats run both.. i'd rather run two and not get a virus than run one and get hit
Thanks for the answer sherer, but I'm confused: what would ZoneAlarm be letting through that a router won't?

sherer 25-10-2006 11:05
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
it's more the fact that your router will let through web traffic etc but zonealarm will warn you each time a new exe tries to connect to the internet.. it's possible for you to get a virus over the net that your router will let through but as soon as that tries to connect to the net you will see it and can block it

i always find it's better to be overprotected

ADd 25-10-2006 19:22
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
The control that a software firewall gives is based upon rules. For Zonealarm it has built in rules, setup for ease of use - especially for those who do not wish to be bogged-down by setting up application behaviour, and connections. Many of these are set by default, and you will not be aware they have been allowed by the firewall, for example Jetico on the other hand is more user intensive, and more for those that know what should/shouldn't be allowed to access what files, and what ports should be opened/closed. Basically you have to set most of these rules up yourself.

While it is true you will still be able to get a virus, unlike a trojan or worm, a virus will not connect to the internet. When you get infected by a trojan it will attempt to connect to the internet to download other malware files to infect your system. This can be through P2P, drive by downloads by visiting dodgy web pages, amoungst others. A good software will alert you that the trojan is attempting to connect, and allow you to block this with a rule. This alert should make you undertake a scan.

A software firewall will not completely protect, but will allow a user more leeway to make mistakes while browsing, downloading or opening attachments. So it may save you from a stray click - only being infected by one file or script - instead of being totally compromised. It also allows the user more control, and gives you more information on what is running, and where it is connecting to.

Of course this does not take into account kernel based rootkits, but that is another story...

In my experience a router will significantly reduce the workload on a software firewall, as it will stop the usual internet 'noise' even getting to the system, and many packets. However it needs to be well setup, and does not allow the control that a software firewall gives. You can protect yourself from worms/viruses and trojans, but the sotware firewall gives you that extra control and security when you do get infected; therefore, in my opinion, it is a must in a modern pc users layered protection.

SnoopZ 25-10-2006 19:29
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADd (Post 34144460)
The control that a software firewall gives is based upon rules. For Zonealarm it has built in rules, setup for ease of use - especially for those who do not wish to be bogged-down by setting up application behaviour, and connections. Many of these are set by default, and you will not be aware they have been allowed by the firewall, for example Jetico on the other hand is more user intensive, and more for those that know what should/shouldn't be allowed to access what files, and what ports should be opened/closed. Basically you have to set most of these rules up yourself.

While it is true you will still be able to get a virus, unlike a trojan or worm, a virus will not connect to the internet. When you get infected by a trojan it will attempt to connect to the internet to download other malware files to infect your system. This can be through P2P, drive by downloads by visiting dodgy web pages, amoungst others. A good software will alert you that the trojan is attempting to connect, and allow you to block this with a rule. This alert should make you undertake a scan.

A software firewall will not completely protect, but will allow a user more leeway to make mistakes while browsing, downloading or opening attachments. So it may save you from a stray click - only being infected by one file or script - instead of being totally compromised. It also allows the user more control, and gives you more information on what is running, and where it is connecting to.

Of course this does not take into account kernel based rootkits, but that is another story...

In my experience a router will significantly reduce the workload on a software firewall, as it will stop the usual internet 'noise' even getting to the system, and many packets. However it needs to be well setup, and does not allow the control that a software firewall gives. You can protect yourself from worms/viruses and trojans, but the sotware firewall gives you that extra control and security when you do get infected; therefore, in my opinion, it is a must in a modern pc users layered protection.
Very well explained. :tu: I agree with you a 100% :)

cookie_365 25-10-2006 20:58
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADd (Post 34144460)
The control that a software firewall gives is based upon rules. For Zonealarm it has built in rules, setup for ease of use - especially for those who do not wish to be bogged-down by setting up application behaviour, and connections. Many of these are set by default, and you will not be aware they have been allowed by the firewall, for example Jetico on the other hand is more user intensive, and more for those that know what should/shouldn't be allowed to access what files, and what ports should be opened/closed. Basically you have to set most of these rules up yourself.

While it is true you will still be able to get a virus, unlike a trojan or worm, a virus will not connect to the internet. When you get infected by a trojan it will attempt to connect to the internet to download other malware files to infect your system. This can be through P2P, drive by downloads by visiting dodgy web pages, amoungst others. A good software will alert you that the trojan is attempting to connect, and allow you to block this with a rule. This alert should make you undertake a scan.

A software firewall will not completely protect, but will allow a user more leeway to make mistakes while browsing, downloading or opening attachments. So it may save you from a stray click - only being infected by one file or script - instead of being totally compromised. It also allows the user more control, and gives you more information on what is running, and where it is connecting to.

Of course this does not take into account kernel based rootkits, but that is another story...

In my experience a router will significantly reduce the workload on a software firewall, as it will stop the usual internet 'noise' even getting to the system, and many packets. However it needs to be well setup, and does not allow the control that a software firewall gives. You can protect yourself from worms/viruses and trojans, but the sotware firewall gives you that extra control and security when you do get infected; therefore, in my opinion, it is a must in a modern pc users layered protection.
Thanks ADd - my PC works fine with ZoneAlarm so I'll stick with that for the moment.

ADd 25-10-2006 21:09
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
No problem, if it works for you, then that it fine. Security is really a compromise between usability and how secure your system is, great thing about Zonealarm is it is user friendly, but like all software, has some reported problems :)

AntiSilence 25-10-2006 21:15
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADd (Post 34144561)
No problem, if it works for you, then that it fine. Security is really a compromise between usability and how secure your system is, great thing about Zonealarm is it is user friendly, but like all software, has some reported problems :)
Don't forget that it helps to use a bit of common sense. I've had a few people ask me about getting rid of a virus/spyware and when I ask what they've been doing, they always say something like "it was my fault for downloading a game crack" :doh:

ADd 25-10-2006 21:19
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AntiSilence
"it was my fault for downloading a game crack"
Hope you reprimanded them accordingly ;)

AntiSilence 25-10-2006 21:20
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ADd (Post 34144569)
Hope you reprimanded them accordingly ;)
Yep, gave them a swift beating... Er, I mean, talking to! ;) lol

homealone 01-11-2006 23:41
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
I paid for the CA security suite, instead of zonealarm

a fresh install seems to have sorted any problems - uninstall ez_antivirus seems to have helped

it remains to be seen if I made the right choice ;)

sherer 02-11-2006 09:44
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
wouldn't touch anything from CA with a barge poll.. we use them at work and all their products are rubbish :Yikes:

AntiSilence 02-11-2006 19:35
Re: XP firewall v. Zonealarm
 
CA... Hmmm........

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11...ar_ca_scandal/


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:47.
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum