Re: XP Firewall and ICS
From: JW (JustPostYourReply_at_ToThisNewsgroup.pls)
Date: 12/31/04
- Next message: boyhill: "About the initial sequence number (ISN) in windows XP SP2"
- Previous message: Duane Arnold: "Re: Worm never seen before"
- In reply to: Alex McClane: "Re: XP Firewall and ICS"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 03:04:23 GMT
http://www.pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,115939,pg,1,00.asp
i can understand the trade-off. sometimes, choosing the very best
combination of anti-virus, anti-spyware, and firewall protection takes an
investment in learning and tweaking that is not small. for most home users,
who really don't want to buy into the investment of learning and tweaking
5-7 different programs (anti-virus, firewall, and 3-5 anti-spyware programs
often recommended on this newsgroup), then see the PC World article above.
PC World tested/evaluated many firewall, anti-spyware, and anti-virus
products recently, and detailed specific problems with Norton and McAfee
products, that led them to recommend Neither one. Only one product was
recommended in Both the firewall and anti-virus categories -- PCcillin
Internet Security by Trend Micro. While i still prefer separate specialized
products, i am now learning the ropes with the PCcillin suite, and like what
i see.
it covers all the bases well, including detection and warning of Outbound
communication, but i would urge readers here to Not give up the superior
anti-spyware products often recommended in this newsgroup, including
IE-Spyad and Spybot S&D. Warnings for inbound communication are not
available in PCcillin's firewall (only Allow or Block).
"Alex McClane" <AlexMcClane@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B8B66521-B39F-47A3-B2EB-3CE4F0078688@microsoft.com...
Thanks for all your responses guys. Very valid points too JW. I might have
to
reconsider my setup with the router. While I do not need the best
virus/firewall software, I'd just prefer ones that do report a little better
than XP's firewall.
Its just that sometimes, its better to know what is trying to get out
especially if one has not initiated anything on the network.....
Thanks all...
AMc
"JW" wrote:
> I also like ZoneAlarm for the superior flexibility in handling both
> inbound
> and outbound traffic. With ZA, it's not just Yes or No. If i am
> expecting
> inbound traffic from somebody particular on a specific port, i can set ZA
> to
> ask me, and answer Yes if it's who i expect, or No if it's somebody i do
> not
> expect. For outbound traffic, i can answer Yes if it's a program i know
> needs outbound permission, or answer No if it's a program that suddenly
> wants to break out without my expecting it. I can even change settings in
> a
> Limited Account. The disadvantage is the complexity and learning curve.
> The advantage of the XP firewall is it's simplicity. Norton's firewall
> got
> some unflattering remarks in the documentation for LeakTest on www.grc.com
>
>
> "Eric Niewoehner" <eric.niewoehner@uas.alaska.edu> wrote in message
> news:ObJrTrl7EHA.3592@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> To answer your question -- yes on both counts. I have just recently
> started messing with Windows XP firewall. I previously utilized Zone
> Alarm and have recently been using Norton's Internet Security firewall.
> I like ZA and Norton's for the very reason that it doesn't take a
> rocket scientist to see which applications are using Internet connections.
>
> On the flip side, I like Windows XP firewall to protect inbound traffic
> and typically use it on server devices. In which case, I am advertising
> services over a network and the firewall is just one way to ensure that
> I don't unintentionally open a port for enquiring minds.
>
> Gateway firewalls usually end at the router, so peer-to-peer access
> should not be affected.
>
> Alex McClane wrote:
>
> > hi there
> > I have a PC with 2 NICs (XP SP2) setup as an Internet Gateway connected
> > to
> > a
> > cable modem using XP ICS. I have the XP firewall enabled by default.
> >
> > The other PCs are connected to this PC through a wireless AP and
> > everything
> > works fine.
> >
> > However, my question is, I have read that while XP Firewall does block
> > incoming traffic, it does not for outgoing traffic (pings, probes etc.).
> > So,
> > will installing a personal firewall on the gateway PC like Sygate or
> > Zone
> > Alarm and disabling XP firewall be better off as they appear to report
> > on
> > both incoming and outgoing traffic.
> >
> > Also, if anybody has this in place, will the personal firewall on the
> > Gateway also block internal traffic between PCs on my network ?
> >
> > Any answer will be greatly appreciated.....
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Alex
>
>
>
- Next message: boyhill: "About the initial sequence number (ISN) in windows XP SP2"
- Previous message: Duane Arnold: "Re: Worm never seen before"
- In reply to: Alex McClane: "Re: XP Firewall and ICS"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|
