FIREWALL CHECK

Posted: 07-27-2008, 12:57 PM
I need some help please. I have Windows Vista Home Premium and Norton
Internet Security 2008.
When I try to log onto the Internet, I get a firewall check. I reply:
(1) disable the (Windows) firewall,
(2) don't perform this check again.
But this check reappears every time I try to log onto the Internet.
How do I stop this message reappearing?

FIREWALL CHECK


Responses to "FIREWALL CHECK"

Charlie Tame
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-27-2008, 01:20 PM
Richard wrote:
> I need some help please. I have Windows Vista Home Premium and Norton
> Internet Security 2008.
> When I try to log onto the Internet, I get a firewall check. I reply:
> (1) disable the (Windows) firewall,
> (2) don't perform this check again.
> But this check reappears every time I try to log onto the Internet.
> How do I stop this message reappearing?

At some point in the future you will be forced to completely remove
Norton, it is the single worst piece of junk ever sold for the PC.
McAfee is no better really.

By default the Windows firewall causes little trouble, but to isolate
the problem you need to go into the Norton Settings and disable it all,
work back from there. Actually it would be better to uninstall Norton
completely but you MUST follow their instructions and use their removal
tool because otherwise trying to uninstall it will likely trash your
system. This is quite deliberate on their part to stop you from getting
rid of it.
FromTheRafters
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-27-2008, 07:00 PM

"Charlie Tame" <charlie@tames.net> wrote in message
news:OwzqLu%237IHA.4928@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Richard wrote:
>> I need some help please. I have Windows Vista Home Premium and Norton
>> Internet Security 2008.
>> When I try to log onto the Internet, I get a firewall check. I reply:
>> (1) disable the (Windows) firewall,
>> (2) don't perform this check again.
>> But this check reappears every time I try to log onto the Internet.
>> How do I stop this message reappearing?
>
>
> At some point in the future you will be forced to completely remove
> Norton, it is the single worst piece of junk ever sold for the PC. McAfee
> is no better really.
>
> By default the Windows firewall causes little trouble, but to isolate the
> problem you need to go into the Norton Settings and disable it all, work
> back from there. Actually it would be better to uninstall Norton
> completely but you MUST follow their instructions and use their removal
> tool because otherwise trying to uninstall it will likely trash your
> system. This is quite deliberate on their part to stop you from getting
> rid of it.
They make a removal tool to stop you from getting rid of it?
Are you insane?
)


Peter Foldes
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-27-2008, 07:48 PM
Get rid of Norton. The Windows Firewall is far better than any 3rd party Firewall

--
Peter

Please Reply to Newsgroup for the benefit of others
Requests for assistance by email can not and will not be acknowledged.

"Richard" <Richard@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:256FECFD-A818-44A7-A689-2882D94E1FE0@microsoft.com...
>I need some help please. I have Windows Vista Home Premium and Norton
> Internet Security 2008.
> When I try to log onto the Internet, I get a firewall check. I reply:
> (1) disable the (Windows) firewall,
> (2) don't perform this check again.
> But this check reappears every time I try to log onto the Internet.
> How do I stop this message reappearing?
Kayman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-28-2008, 12:35 AM
On Sun, 27 Jul 2008 05:57:00 -0700, Richard wrote:
> I need some help please. I have Windows Vista Home Premium and Norton
> Internet Security 2008.
> When I try to log onto the Internet, I get a firewall check. I reply:
> (1) disable the (Windows) firewall,
> (2) don't perform this check again.
> But this check reappears every time I try to log onto the Internet.
> How do I stop this message reappearing?
A number of experts agree that the retail AV version of McAfee, Norton and
Trend Micro has become cumbersome and bloated for the average user.

The major Norton criticisms are related to stability and footprint, the
most common problem being slow-downs because of the massive system
resources Norton hogs. There are products on the market with equal or
better test results than Symantec's products, consuming less resources at a
lower price (even free ones).

The retail version of Norton can play havoc with your pc. Uninstall it
using Norton's own uninstall tool:

Download and run the Norton Removal Tool and try to get a refund:
http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT...05033108162039
The Norton Removal Tool uninstalls all Norton 2008/2007/2006/2005/2004/2003
products and Norton 360 from your computer.

You are not going to find anything better than the Vista FW and Vista in
itself due to the advanced features the FW and Vista are using.

Jesper's Blogs-
At Least This Snake Oil Is Free.
http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesp...l-is-free.aspx
Windows Firewall: the best new security feature in Vista?
http://blogs.technet.com/jesper_joha...01/426921.aspx

Exploring The Windows Firewall.
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tec...l/default.aspx
"If you try to block outbound connections from a computer that’s already
compromised, how can you be sure that the computer is really doing what you
ask? The answer: you can’t. Outbound protection is security theater—it’s a
gimmick that only gives the impression of improving your security without
doing anything that actually does improve your security. This is why
outbound protection didn’t exist in the Windows XP firewall and why it
doesn’t exist in the Windows Vista™ firewall."

Managing the Windows Vista Firewall
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/m.../cc510323.aspx

Tap into the Vista firewall's advanced configuration features
http://articles.techrepublic.com.com...7-6098592.html
"...once you discover the secret of accessing its advanced configuration
settings via the MMC snap-in, you'll find it to be far more configurable
and functional. At last, Windows comes with a sophisticated personal
firewall that can be used to set up outbound rules as well as inbound, with
the ability to customize rules to fit your precise needs."
Or
Configure Vista Firewall to support outbound packet filtering
http://searchwindowssecurity.techtar...247138,00.html
Or
Vista Firewall Control (Free versions available).
Protects your applications from undesirable network incoming and outgoing
activity, controls applications internet access.
http://sphinx-soft.com/Vista/
The free version may be all you need, check the comparisons under
the "Download and Buy" link.

Real-time AV applications - for viral malware.
Do not utilize more than one (1) real-time anti-virus scanning engine!
Disable the e-mail scanning function during installation (Custom
Installation on some AV apps.) as it provides no additional protection.

Why You Don't Need Your Anti-Virus Program to Scan Your E-Mail
http://thundercloud.net/infoave/tuto...ning/index.htm
Viral Irony: The Most Common Cause of Corruption.
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/IE/...orruption.mspx

Avira AntiVir® Personal - FREE Antivirus
http://www.free-av.com/
You may wish to consider removing the 'AntiVir Nagscreen'
http://www.elitekiller.com/files/dis...ntivir_nag.htm
or
Free antivirus - avast! 4 Home Edition
It includes ANTI-SPYWARE protection, certified by the West Coast Labs
Checkmark process, and ANTI-ROOTKIT DETECTION based on the best-in class
GMER technology.
http://www.avast.com/eng/avast_4_home.html
(Choose Custom Installation and under Resident
Protection, uncheck: Internet Mail and Outlook/Exchange.)
or
AVG Anti-Virus Free Edition
http://free.grisoft.com/
(Choose custom install and untick the email scanner plugin.)
or
ESET NOD32 Antivirus - Not Free
http://www.eset.com/
or
Kaspersky® Anti-Virus 7.0 - Not Free
http://www.kaspersky.com/homeuser

and (optional but highly recommendable)

On-demand AV applications.
(add them to your arsenal and use them as a "second opinion" av scanner).
David H. Lipman's MULTI_AV Tool
http://www.pctipp.ch/ds/28400/28470/Multi_AV.exe
http://www.pctipp.ch/downloads/dl/35905.asp
English:
http://www.raymond.cc/blog/archives/...irus-for-free/
Additional Instructions:
http://pcdid.com/Multi_AV.htm
and/or
Kaspersky's AVPTool
http://downloads5.kaspersky-labs.com/devbuilds/AVPTool/
There's no updating involved since the scanning engine is updated
several times a day and you simply download the updated scanner whenever
you want to do a scan.

Dr.Web CureIt!® Utility - FREE
http://www.freedrweb.com/cureit/

Malwarebytes© Corporation - Anti-Malware
http://www.malwarebytes.org/mbam/program/mbam-setup.exe
Note: It is Free for private use. Just download (do NOT buy) and install.

A-S applications - for non-viral malware.
The effectiveness of an individual A-S scanners can be wide-ranging and
oftentimes a collection of scanners is best. There isn't one software that
cleans and immunizes you against everything. That's why you need multiple
products to do the job i.e. overlap their coverage - one may catch what
another may miss, (grab'em all).

SuperAntispyware - Free
http://www.superantispyware.com/supe...freevspro.html
and
Ad-Aware 2007 - Free
http://www.lavasoftusa.com/products/ad_aware_free.php
http://www.download.com/3000-2144-10045910.html
and
Spybot Search & Destroy - Free
http://www.safer-networking.org/en/download/index.html
and
Windows Defender - Free (build-in in Vista)
http://www.microsoft.com/athome/secu...e/default.mspx
WD monitors the start-registry and hooks registers/files to prevent spyware
and worms to install to the OS.
Interesting reading:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,136195/article.html
"...Windows Defender did excel in behavior-based protection, which detects
changes to key areas of the system without having to know anything about
the actual threat."

After the software is updated, it is suggested scanning the system in Safe
Mode.

A clarification on the terminology: the word "malware" is short for
"malicious software." Most Anti-Virus applications detect many types of
malware such as viruses, worms, trojans, etc.
What AV applications usually don't detect is "non-viral" malware, and the
term "non-viral malware" is normally used to refer to things like spyware
and adware.

Good luck
Hank Arnold (MVP)
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-28-2008, 09:05 AM
Peter Foldes wrote:
> Get rid of Norton. The Windows Firewall is far better than any 3rd party Firewall
>
????????? I can accept that there is an argument as to whether it is
adequate or not (I'm clearly on the "It's not!" camp), but I've *NEVER*
heard it rated as better than any other firewall!!!

What do you base this statement on??

--

Regards,
Hank Arnold
Microsoft MVP
Windows Server - Directory Services
Paul Montgomery
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-28-2008, 09:23 AM
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 05:05:19 -0400, "Hank Arnold (MVP)"
<rasilon@aol.com> wrote:
>Peter Foldes wrote:
>> Get rid of Norton. The Windows Firewall is far better than any 3rd party Firewall
>>
>
>????????? I can accept that there is an argument as to whether it is
>adequate or not (I'm clearly on the "It's not!" camp), but I've *NEVER*
>heard it rated as better than any other firewall!!!
>
>What do you base this statement on??
This is the same guy who last week told someone that a failing CMOS
battery was the probably cause of a system clock losing time during
the day while it was powered-up with Windows running.
Kayman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-28-2008, 11:05 AM
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 05:05:19 -0400, Hank Arnold (MVP) wrote:
> Peter Foldes wrote:
>> Get rid of Norton. The Windows Firewall is far better than any 3rd party Firewall
>>
>
> ????????? I can accept that there is an argument as to whether it is
> adequate or not (I'm clearly on the "It's not!" camp), but I've *NEVER*
> heard it rated as better than any other firewall!!!
Peter said: "any *3rd party* Firewall"* and most probably referred
specifically to 3rd party software personal firewalls (PFW).
> What do you base this statement on??
I can't speak for Peter but there are credible reports in circulation
confirming his assertion. The reports are not commercially sponsored.
BTW, test reports conducted by some firewall testing organizations used to
test the Windows Firewall for *outbound traffic control* (a function which
never ever was incorporated) and compared it with 3rd party f/w apps.
+Bob+
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-28-2008, 11:33 PM
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:05:58 +0700, Kayman
<kaymanDeleteThis@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>Peter said: "any *3rd party* Firewall"* and most probably referred
>specifically to 3rd party software personal firewalls (PFW).
>> What do you base this statement on??
>
>I can't speak for Peter but there are credible reports in circulation
>confirming his assertion. The reports are not commercially sponsored.
I think you need to be a little more definitive on what reports to
make the claim you did. Lots of reports (in many industries) make
claims but when you examine their testing criteria and methods you
come to other conclusions.
>BTW, test reports conducted by some firewall testing organizations used to
>test the Windows Firewall for *outbound traffic control* (a function which
>never ever was incorporated) and compared it with 3rd party f/w apps.
Which is why you want a real personal FireWall like Zone Alarm. If you
have a router in place with NAT and WPA with a good password, inbound
is of relatively limited concern. Outbound, OTOH, not only prevents MS
programs and others from calling home for no apparent reason, but
helps identify when an evil program has infected your system and is
attempting net access. These issues are much more of a concern than
inbound access.


Mr. Arnold
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: FIREWALL CHECK
Posted: 07-29-2008, 01:00 AM

"+Bob+" <uctraing@ultranet.com> wrote in message
newsgls845buie0u0gltl06bevu8sn6g1kjv5@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:05:58 +0700, Kayman
> <kaymanDeleteThis@operamail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>Peter said: "any *3rd party* Firewall"* and most probably referred
>>specifically to 3rd party software personal firewalls (PFW).
>
>>> What do you base this statement on??
>>
>>I can't speak for Peter but there are credible reports in circulation
>>confirming his assertion. The reports are not commercially sponsored.
>
> I think you need to be a little more definitive on what reports to
> make the claim you did. Lots of reports (in many industries) make
> claims but when you examine their testing criteria and methods you
> come to other conclusions.
>
>>BTW, test reports conducted by some firewall testing organizations used to
>>test the Windows Firewall for *outbound traffic control* (a function which
>>never ever was incorporated) and compared it with 3rd party f/w apps.
>
> Which is why you want a real personal FireWall like Zone Alarm. If you
> have a router in place with NAT and WPA with a good password, inbound
> is of relatively limited concern. Outbound, OTOH, not only prevents MS
> programs and others from calling home for no apparent reason, but
> helps identify when an evil program has infected your system and is
> attempting net access. These issues are much more of a concern than
> inbound access.
>
And they can cut through the snake-oil crap in ZA or any other solution like
ZA like a hot knife through butter. The job of a personal FW (it's not a
FW)/packet filter is stop unsolicited inbound packets, by default, from
reaching services and the O/S running on the machine and to prevent outbound
packets from leaving the machine, by setting packet filtering by port
TCP/UDP, protocol -- HTTP, FTP, ICMP, etc, etc, IP, subnet mask or domain
for inbound and outbound traffic.

The job of the personal FW/packet filter has been blown up out of
proportion, and it's not a malware solution, trying to protect you from you
that it cannot do. That's snake-oil and candy technology in them as a home
user security blanket giving a false sense of security.


http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1840

There are other ways, that one can cut through the crap snake-oil like
Application Control in PFW(S). Another way is to beat the PFW(S) to the
network connection during the boot process before the PFW service is even up
and running. It has done its thing and is done before the PFW could even
know that it has happened.

 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vista Security Center - Firewall Check artgal Windows Vista Security 3 07-16-2007 01:14 AM
Firewall Check Terry Windows XP New Users 5 02-20-2004 03:41 PM
Check Boxes without Check Marks Norman Windows XP Performance & Maintenance 1 02-13-2004 04:31 PM
Explorer tool Check Disk unable to complete the disk check theDude Windows XP Help & Support 2 10-06-2003 02:39 AM
How check if Firewall working OK? Steve007 Windows XP Security & Administration 2 10-05-2003 04:21 AM