Re: Firewall for Laptop



Leythos wrote:
If you find Usenet interaction to be a waste of time, then why are you here?

Since '84 and still not knowing the most common Usenet jokes? ;-)

So far any modern malware easily shuts down any Personal Firewall with ease.

And that would include the Windows Firewall

Right. So, what's your point against WF?

Fact is that I can setup ZoneAlarm on a dialup system, leave
the user alone for a year or more and come back to a clean machine when
it's time to upgrade.

Now I prefer staying in this parallel universe.

I've never been able to do that when people use
the Windows Firewall only.

Because most don't? At most for stupid reasons.

One other thing - I've never seen any personal firewalls
disabled/shutdown on anyone's machine, ever.

OK, why didn't you write that you lack of real world experience in first
place?

A NAT device doesn't stop them from downloading warez and installing the
malware directly or browsing the web with the WindowsUpdate client
(MSIE). This is the most common cause of malware infection today.
And neither would a personal firewall and you know as well as I do that
Windows Firewall would not even think about blocking it
A NAT Appliance doesn't either.

What part of inbound protection did you miss?

The part that a NAT Appliance reliably does so?
The part that this part is about that inbound connections are not the
major problem?

Since your typical user
can't installed their OS and patch it BEFORE they are compromised, the
NAT Router gives them the ability to install/patch without being
compromised

Why didn't you tell that you simply want to sell NAT Routers?
You can easily do the same without one, for free, so your point being?

While doesn't mean crap, as most users have no idea how to disable
services,

That's what your job is. Give'em a script and no only-sometimes-working
NAT Router workaround

how to filter,

But you're suggesting the usage of Personal Firewalls? Get serious!

So, since experience shows that people behind a NAT Appliance
have a significantly better level of security, what are you suggesting?

That's you're readjusting your view on reality. Your so-called
experience obviously isn't worth anything.

and third-party solutions have fewer exposure
points than Windows Firewall does.

In which parallel univserse?
.



Relevant Pages

  • Re: Windows firewall
    ... that blocks unsolicited inbound connections - what the Windows Firewall ... What NAT Router would you recommend for a Windows XP/Linux box with ...
    (alt.comp.anti-virus)
  • Re: XPs Firewall
    ... Windows Firewall would certainly have blocked them. ... ZoneAlarm has better reporting and is more configurable than the Windows ... It is also easier to configure different levels of protection ... Personally I use a NAT router and the Windows Firewall. ...
    (microsoft.public.security.virus)
  • Re: Windows firewall
    ... that blocks unsolicited inbound connections - what the Windows Firewall ... What NAT Router would you recommend for a Windows XP/Linux box with ...
    (alt.comp.anti-virus)
  • Re: Why do I need a software firewall?
    ... >> And a NAT Router is still better protection than Windows Firewall ... > I'm not talking about FTP servers here, ...
    (comp.security.misc)