Re: XP's Firewall
- From: B. Nice <b__nice@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 13:07:13 GMT
On Tue, 29 Aug 2006 11:58:26 GMT, Leythos <void@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In this discussion it's been proven how worthless Windows XP Firewall
really is. It's been proven that any other firewall, since they have
more chance to inform the user of changes/actions of their system is
going to be a better option than the Windows XP Firewall.
You have'nt proved anything. Normally you yourself will not accept
anything unless all facts are present. Former discussions in c.s.f.
clearly shows that. Therefore you have'nt proved anything. You have
mentioned your personal opinion on the windows firewall - that's all.
And that's okay. But it's clearly not a proof.
But on the other hand it's of course easy to prove something if you
yourself define the criteria.
Other than bugs in software, which Windows is not immune too,
I see no reason why third-party firewall applications are not better than Windows
XP firewall. At least with third-party firewall solutions you have a
chance to know that something is happening as/before it happens, with
Windows XP Firewall you don't have a chance to know anything as/before
And since you seem to believe in the nonsense of controlling something
already allowed to run (in awfully many cases with admin rights) we
will never come to an agreement.