Re: XP's Firewall
- From: B. Nice <b__nice@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 06:58:41 GMT
On Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:31:51 -0400, "David H. Lipman"
<DLipman~nospam~@Verizon.Net> wrote:
From: "Dan" <spamyou@xxxxxxxx>
| BTW, I am still waiting for an article or documentation on how the
| Windows Firewall is better than the Zone Alarm Professional Firewall.
You won't find it.
You won't find trustworthy and independent articles documenting the
opposite either. You will find a lot of opinions, though. Most
opinions influenced by very skilled marketing departments at vendors
like ZoneLabs doing a great job.
However, when technically skilled people put firewalls like ZA to the
test, they are not that impressed. You could also ask security experts
what they in general think about the idea of running a "firewall" on
the same machine as it is supposed to protect.
Its simplistic interface does not provide for complex "rules". This is one reason Microsoft
has released OneCare which contains a FireWall application.
Now why would Microsoft have to realease a product with a FireWall if the SWinXP FireWall
was sufficiennt ?
Because market demand is stronger than common sense? ;-)
On the sdame note, OneCare also is anti virus. It falls well below AV industry standrads.
and OneCare should be avoided as a security suite.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: Dan
- Re: XP's Firewall
- References:
- XP's Firewall
- From: B.W.
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: Dan
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: B . Nice
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: Dan
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: B . Nice
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: Dan
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: B . Nice
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: Dan
- Re: XP's Firewall
- From: David H. Lipman
- XP's Firewall
- Prev by Date: Re: XP's Firewall
- Next by Date: Re: XP's Firewall
- Previous by thread: Re: XP's Firewall
- Next by thread: Re: XP's Firewall
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|