Re: Password vault software

"Ed" wrote in message news:L3Oxi.119$JD.54@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Vanguard" wrote ...
same host. Very nasty malware can circumvent firewalls but you aren't talking about malware.

What would you call a little piece of code embedded in a passworad vault
that shipped the passwords back to the software provider? Sounds "mal" to me.

The malware has to target the specific software firewall. Most malware doesn't even check for a firewall. They just try to connect. I said "very" nasty malware, the type specifically aimed to defeat software firewalls. Comodo is better than many in that it can block any network connects until it loads (to eliminate that window of opportunity) provided you enable that option. It is also more difficult for malware to kill Comodo but not impossible (compared to many of the other software firewalls).

I do have Panda AV software which offers a firewall. I've never activated it
for (misguided) reasons stated previously. I will look to see what it can do.

You might want to visit http://www.firewallleaktester.com/ to see how well your Panda firewall resists leaks and termination. For example, if you visit http://www.firewallleaktester.com/termination_overview.php (click on the Results button at the bottom) for the termination testing, you'll see the free Comodo firewall fared equally or better to the paid firewalls (and other free firewalls fared worse than Comodo). In the summary, Comodo (free) was third with Outpost ($40) and Kasperksy ($80) taking 1st and 2nd place, respectively. Panda wasn't even included in the test list (or did so poorly that it ranked at 14th place, or worse, so as not to be included), or it simply repackages another firewall (Computer Associates, for example, repackages ZoneAlarm under their EzArmor product name). However, if you visit their leak testing results at http://www.firewallleaktester.com/tests_overview.php, Comodo only get a mediocre rating. Also notice that ZoneAlarm Pro does well but the free version does very poorly. Jetico was 1st in preventing leaks but poor at preventing itself from being terminated. Outpost was 1st or 2nd in both tests. Note that these tests are over year old so there has probably been some change in results (but don't expect a poorly rated product to suddenly jump to the top; they usually just jostle around within a few ranking positions of each other).

I use Comodo because it's hard to beat free unless the product's quality and effectiveness equates to its price. I don't want a firewall that can be easily terminated. I also want one that can block connections until the full firewall is loaded. For the mediocre leak protection, I rely on a layered approach to prevent malware getting on my host in the first place, the utmost of which is an IPS (intrusion prevention system) program, like System Safety Monitor (also free although the paid version has more protections). If a program can't get into real memory, it can't run. But an IPS is not for the newbies or lazy users.

Comodo's firewall already includes IPS for apps and processes wanting a network connection. Their next version anti-virus program is supposed to also include IPS (by integrating their somewhat antiquated BOClean product but improving it to meet with standard features found in current IPS software). Right now the antivirus program is far too bloated on memory consumption. For now, I use AVG for anti-virus protection although I might go back to AntiVir although after Avira it became bannerware; see http://www.av-comparatives.org/seiten/ergebnisse_2007_02.php for coverage comparisons (Panda isn't listed but maybe they bundle in someone else's AV product that is listed, but Comodo's AV isn't listed, either; also, they don't show std deviation so don't go by the total score but instead check how consistent they are on coverage across all categories but giving Windows virus the heaviest weighting).

.

Quantcast