Re: Making Outpost work
From: Darko Gavrilovic (darkoDOTgavrilovicATutorontoDOTca)
Date: 03/25/05
- Next message: rguse: "Mail through Port 80?"
- Previous message: Mike: "Re: Making Outpost work"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Franklin: "Making Outpost work"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2005 07:53:23 -0600
1~~
Franklin <no_thanks@mail.com> wrote in news:961E6208F2A2271F3M4@
204.153.244.156:
> I am on XP Pro + SP1 and have taken out a trial of Outpost Pro 2.5.
>
> I am finding it quite hard configuring this firewall. At the moment
> my Opera browser gets blocked whenever my third-party clipboard
> manager (Yankee Clipper) pastes a URL into the address bar.
>
> Outpost complains about the clipboard utility trying to change a
> component of the brwoser. Huh? I don't understand it and what's
> worse i don't know how to prevent Outpost blocking the browser at
> that point.
>
> Can anyone advise please.
>
> ---
>
> On a larger scale, is it worth peristing with Outpost? As it seems
> like quite a headache to get right.
>
> I do NOT REALLY NEED FEATURES for mail attachments, cookies, ActiveX,
> scripts, etc. Those things my I do well enough in the browser or in
> my antivirus software and I don't have a MAJOR NEED for a second line
> of defense against them.
>
> As beackground I have used:
>
> Sygate Free 5.5 and Sygate Pro 5.5 and both were ok (reporting is
> better than others but I would have like even more reporting tools).
>
> free Kerio (2.1.5) but reporting and user interface were always a bit
> too tricky to use comfortably.
>
> Zone Alarm Pro 4.5 but I continually get alert messages about
> loopback 127.0.0.1 and suspected application hijacking (EG when the
> browser calls the emailer). Reporting is not good either.
>
> Is it worth me trying a different firewall?
Hi. I don't know what kind of reporting you need.I use Sygate myself. But
have always thought the software firewalls more or less are very similar -
except for windows firewalls, which are close to useless. Here is a link to
comparisons. There are other tests if you google.
http://www.firewallleaktester.com/tests.htm
If you are thinking of possibly adding an additional hardware device that
acts like a firewall, you may get the added reporting you need. A Cisco 501
is a little extreme.
I try to find useful and user friendly implementations of Linux. I have
found 2 products that are quite easy to use and have a nice friendly
support community where you can aks questions an not recieve rude replys. I
deploy both.
smoothwall - http://smoothwall.org/
build on linux. you can install it on a machine with quite low hardware
specs, depending on the features you need. i have heard of people running
it on a PII with 64mb RAM. A great way to re-use old machines.
monowall - http://m0n0.ch/wall/
Build on bsd. Similar to above. More options and a little less user
friendly. Added bonus is it's designed to work on soekris hardware thats
optimized for firewall, router functionality and designed to be running
24/7.
In both cases you can extract very indept reporting from them.
Cheers
1~
-- "Why do they call it rush hour when nothing moves?", Robin Williams
- Next message: rguse: "Mail through Port 80?"
- Previous message: Mike: "Re: Making Outpost work"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Franklin: "Making Outpost work"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
