Re: Less secure? -- Re: Tiny Personal Firewall - which version?

From: harry wong (wong_at_aol.com)
Date: 03/03/04 

Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 11:26:45 GMT

"Piotr Makley" <pmakley@mail.com> wrote in message
news:94A07A0F7591731E75@127.0.0.1...
> donutbandit <none@none.com> wrote:
>
> > Piotr Makley <pmakley@mail.com> wrote in
> >
> >
> >> Now I want to try another firewall. I have come across Tiny
> >> Personal Firewall. I installed the free version 2.0.14. I
> >> this the latest free version?
> >
> > No - in fact, it's quite old.
> >
> > That firewall has been known as Kerio Personal Firewall for over
> > 2 years now.
> >
> > The latest version is 2.1.5 and can be gotten here:
> >
> > http://kerio.com/dwn/kpf/kerio-pf-2.1.5-en-win.exe
> >
> > It's the same firewall but improved over the version you have. I
> > also think it's the best free firewall there is.
>
> Is the free version 2.1.5 of Tiny/Kerio any less secure than the paid
> version 5.0 of Tiny? http://www.tinysoftware.com/
>
> Is the difference mainly due to additional features?
>
> If so then are any of these additional features really worth having?

I think you should also seriously consider Outpost Pro. I have been trying
different FW's for the past few months as a supplement to a hardware
firewall (I want something that would prevent any Trojans that I may get to
dial out- although with Symantec Corporate, a stand alone Trojan scanner and
common sense I don't think that this is likely- and to prevent java scripts
and activeX controls to be downloaded and run on my computer).

I've found that the new version of Kerio (4.0.13) is very good but Outpost
has the best record against most of the firewall tests that are available.
They both take up an equal amount of resources (about 15,000). As to Tiny-
it is a pain to set up. The former 2 already have very good pre-configured
rules so personally I don't see any point in using it.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: outbound filtering
    ... Nonetheless, it IS a hardware firewall, and since you felt inclined to mention that it wasn't, someone needed to provide correct information before whoever reads this thread becomes as confused about firewalls and Internet Security in general as you. ... Maybe Packet Sniffing, or Monitoring not just when a connection is made, but when an application changes (Kerio Personal Firewall provides this PROTECTION, if a process is changed, the user is alerted to it). ... I do know that when one process tries to access another (which is interprocess communication, not what you were trying to demonstrate just now), that Kerio does protect against that by alerting the user and asking if he/she wants to allow or deny. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Locking down Remote Desktop.
    ... If you don't want to risk installing SP2-beta then Kerio Personal Firewall ... will allow you to specify IP ranges. ... > allow only certain IP addresses to access TCP Port 3389... ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.work_remotely)
  • Re: Fucking useless kerio firewall
    ... We're using both the Kerio Personal Firewall 2.15 and Tiny Personal ... SecureRemote, AltaVista VPN, and the Neoteris IPSec VPN. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: Less secure? -- Re: Tiny Personal Firewall - which version?
    ... >> That firewall has been known as Kerio Personal Firewall for over ... > If so then are any of these additional features really worth having? ...
    (comp.security.misc)
  • Re: Less secure? -- Re: Tiny Personal Firewall - which version?
    ... >> That firewall has been known as Kerio Personal Firewall for over ... > If so then are any of these additional features really worth having? ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)