Firewall etc

Posted: 07-16-2008, 10:10 AM
Can anyone comment on the effectiveness of the MS supplied Firewall and
Defender offering when compared to other commercial products (such as McAfee
and Norton)? I use Norton at the moment, and it seems to me that if one is
offered through Vista for nothing, I may as well use it rather than pay for
another?

Firewall etc


Responses to "Firewall etc"

Kayman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 10:37 AM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:10:01 -0700, jo5030 wrote:
> Can anyone comment on the effectiveness of the MS supplied Firewall and
> Defender
Both are good-quality applications, especially the firewall. (Steer away
from 3rd party software (so-called) firewall applications!!).
Educational reading:
Managing the Windows Vista Firewall
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/m.../cc510323.aspx

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."

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
> offering when compared to other commercial products (such as McAfee
> and Norton)?
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*).
> I use Norton at the moment, and it seems to me that if one is
> offered through Vista for nothing, I may as well use it rather than pay for
> another?
Download and run the Norton Removal Tool:
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.

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 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

Chappy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 10:42 AM

Matousec ran a very comprehensive test of the available products fo
Windows.
'Matousec Firewall Challenge
(http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-challenge/)

Windows firewall in it's default state scored a rather dismal 5% bu
does better with some advanced configuration, still not as good a
others tho
Comodo scored the best for Free firewalls at 95% and is the choice o
many of the security pros here in the Forums. Some in the Newsgroup
here get rather "testy" when anyone mentions (God forbid) using a 3r
party firewall...call them "Snake Oil" and the like, but Matousec's tes
suite is very comprehensive and runs the toughest firewall attacks an
go-rounds available so I'll take their word over the ...ahem "other" gu
here who may come in and start bashing this post for Blasphemy

--
Chapp

::*_DAVE_* ::- vista ultimate 64bit - nzxt lexa classic case - asu
commando mobo (p965/ich8r) - intel e6750 core 2 - zalman 9700 cpu coole
- 4g's crucial ballistix tracer ddr2 pc26400 ram - bfg 8800gts oc2 320m
- 2 x 22\" w2207 lcd monitors - 2 x 250g, 2 x 500g sata ii hdd's, 2 dv
burners c/w lightscribe (sony, tsst) - enermax noisetaker ii 600w ps
with custom chrome cable sleeving - hauppauge hdtv tv tuner card - 5.
logitech z5500 speakers - 15 in 1 multi-card reader

::*We will _NEVER_ Forget!*::
John Barnett MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 11:31 AM
Personally I only use the Windows Firewall and have found it more than
adequate. McAfee and Norton I would not use they are system hoggers and,
especially Norton, cause more problems than they solve.

--

--
John Barnett MVP
Windows XP Associate Expert
Windows Desktop Experience

Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org

The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable for
any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of the
use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
mail/post..


"jo5030" <jo5030@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FD2CC28F-2836-48DD-9D2C-7D48BB8E1A99@microsoft.com...
> Can anyone comment on the effectiveness of the MS supplied Firewall and
> Defender offering when compared to other commercial products (such as
> McAfee
> and Norton)? I use Norton at the moment, and it seems to me that if one
> is
> offered through Vista for nothing, I may as well use it rather than pay
> for
> another?
Root Kit
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 11:57 AM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 05:42:05 -0500, Chappy <guest@unknown-email.com>
wrote:
>Matousec ran a very comprehensive test of the available products for
>Windows..
>'Matousec Firewall Challenge'
>(http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-challenge/)
>
>Windows firewall in it's default state scored a rather dismal 5% but
>does better with some advanced configuration, still not as good as
>others tho.
This is getting boring.... Testing the windows FW for outbound
capabilities is like testing your car for the ability to fly....
>Comodo scored the best for Free firewalls at 95%
Yes. Because they specifically targeted leak tests in order to gain
popularity. You do know that Comodo FW was developed for company
promotional purposes, don't you?
>and is the choice of
>many of the security pros here in the Forums.
Pros? What's a pro?
>Some in the Newsgroups here get rather "testy" when anyone mentions
>(God forbid) using a 3rd party firewall...call them "Snake Oil"
Well, that's what they are. But heck, do go install them if it makes
you feel good. Just realize that there is a difference between real
security and the subjective feeling of security. Indeed, the latter
has value - just not in a technical sense.
>and the like, but Matousec's test suite is very comprehensive and runs
>the toughest firewall attacks and go-rounds available
They test for some publicly known and also some self-made ones. The
problem is there is no end to ways of leaking. Dealing with outbound
control is nothing but gap stopping.
>so I'll take their word over the ...ahem "other" guy here who may come in and start
>bashing this post for Blasphemy.
I don't care, but you are aware that the malware industry offer
services like testing your malware's ability to by-pass firewalls and
anti-malware products, right?
FromTheRafters
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 12:25 PM
I assume you are talking about the security suite offerings of
McAfee and Norton. In that case, their offerings provide an
"anti-virus" along with the personal firewall and anti-foistware
Vista offers.

There are excellent freeware programs in all categories, so
there is no reason to consider yourself obligated to run what
you already have.

I use the firewall application and defender that came with Vista
and added Avast! anti-virus (free). I also am behind a router/
wireless access point that has (is) a fairly configurable firewall.

Modern personal firewall applications have attempted to tackle
data leakage. You may be the kind of person willing to pay for
a good one of these, I'm not.

"jo5030" <jo5030@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:FD2CC28F-2836-48DD-9D2C-7D48BB8E1A99@microsoft.com...
> Can anyone comment on the effectiveness of the MS supplied Firewall and
> Defender offering when compared to other commercial products (such as
> McAfee
> and Norton)? I use Norton at the moment, and it seems to me that if one
> is
> offered through Vista for nothing, I may as well use it rather than pay
> for
> another?
Mark H
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 12:30 PM
Ditto!

Additionally, a simple router is cheaper than any software product you will
buy, doesn't require annual updates and with a simple one time setup will
provide a stronger defense than most firewalls. (Even if not setup for
portforwarding.)
http://portforward.com/english/route...outerindex.htm

But, no matter what you use, if you click "OK" or "Continue", your security
has just been bypassed. You must use common sense.

"John Barnett MVP" <freelance@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:6BEC62CF-D109-4270-8EEF-133CE873E4D9@microsoft.com...
> Personally I only use the Windows Firewall and have found it more than
> adequate. McAfee and Norton I would not use they are system hoggers and,
> especially Norton, cause more problems than they solve.
>
> --
>
> --
> John Barnett MVP
> Windows XP Associate Expert
> Windows Desktop Experience
>
> Web: http://xphelpandsupport.mvps.org
> Web: http://vistasupport.mvps.org
>
> The information in this mail/post is supplied "as is". No warranty of any
> kind, either expressed or implied, is made in relation to the accuracy,
> reliability or content of this mail/post. The Author shall not be liable
for
> any direct, indirect, incidental or consequential damages arising out of
the
> use of, or inability to use, information or opinions expressed in this
> mail/post..
>
>
> "jo5030" <jo5030@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:FD2CC28F-2836-48DD-9D2C-7D48BB8E1A99@microsoft.com...
> > Can anyone comment on the effectiveness of the MS supplied Firewall and
> > Defender offering when compared to other commercial products (such as
> > McAfee
> > and Norton)? I use Norton at the moment, and it seems to me that if
one
> > is
> > offered through Vista for nothing, I may as well use it rather than pay
> > for
> > another?
>

Ken Blake, MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 03:55 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:10:01 -0700, jo5030
<jo5030@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Can anyone comment on the effectiveness of the MS supplied Firewall and
> Defender offering when compared to other commercial products (such as McAfee
> and Norton)? I use Norton at the moment, and it seems to me that if one is
> offered through Vista for nothing, I may as well use it rather than pay for
> another?

There are three kinds of software products you need for adequate
protection:

1. Firewall. I used to prefer the ZA firewall (or other third-party
firewalls) because it also provided outbound protection. I've become
convinced, however, that outbound protection is meaningless. Once one
of the nasties gets into your computer, it can essentially do whatever
it wants, including circumventing the firewall. So the extra
protection that a firewall that monitors outbound traffic provides is
more apparent than real, and I think the Windows firewall is fine.

2. An anti-virus program. Windows provides *nothing* in this regard,
and you should run a third-party product. I recommend NOD32, if you
want to pay for a product, or the freeware Avast! if you don't.

3. Anti-spyware programs. No single anti-spyware is adequate to
protect you against everything. Windows defender comes with Windows
Vista, but it alone isn't sufficient. I recommend adding at least one
or more of the following: Spybot Search and Destroy, Spyware Blaster,
Adaware, and Super AntiSpyware.

You mention McAfee and Norton. In my view (and that of many other
regulars here), Norton is the worst product on the market, and McAfgee
is only slightly better. Although they are the best-known and the
biggest sellers, I strongly recommend against both.


--
Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP - Windows Desktop Experience
Please Reply to the Newsgroup
Kerry Brown
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 04:20 PM
"Chappy" <guest@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:678d66473649f0292e558288ba35f829@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> Matousec ran a very comprehensive test of the available products for
> Windows..
> 'Matousec Firewall Challenge'
> (http://www.matousec.com/projects/firewall-challenge/)
>
> Windows firewall in it's default state scored a rather dismal 5% but
> does better with some advanced configuration, still not as good as
> others tho.
> Comodo scored the best for Free firewalls at 95% and is the choice of
> many of the security pros here in the Forums. Some in the Newsgroups
> here get rather "testy" when anyone mentions (God forbid) using a 3rd
> party firewall...call them "Snake Oil" and the like, but Matousec's test
> suite is very comprehensive and runs the toughest firewall attacks and
> go-rounds available so I'll take their word over the ...ahem "other" guy
> here who may come in and start bashing this post for Blasphemy.
>

I guess I'd be considered a "security pro". I manage network security for
several businesses for a living. Microsoft has seen fit to award me the
"Most Valuable Professional" award for the past three years. I totally
disagree with your statements. The only time I use third party software
firewalls with older OS's that don't have a built in firewall. Software
firewalls that advertise outbound filtering as some sort of anti-malware
goodness are indeed snake oil. Yes they stop some malware from phoning home.
There is no way they can stop a determined hacker once your computer is
owned. The fact that they stop some poorly programmed malware only gives
people a false sense of security. Outbound filtering can be useful. You may
want to stop business users from using p2p apps or messenger while at work.
You may want to stop your kids from accessing certain sites or using certain
applications. A software firewall running on the computer being used is not
the best solution for this. If you do want to use a software firewall for
these purposes the built in Vista firewall does this better than any 3rd
party software firewall I've seen. Personally I use either a hardware
firewall or a Linux box as a gateway device for doing this kind of stuff.
Even most home routers have these features now. Use the appropriate tool for
the job. Software firewalls aren't really the appropriate tool to stop
malware once it's on your computer.

--
Kerry Brown
MS-MVP - Windows Desktop Experience: Systems Administration
http://www.vistahelp.ca/phpBB2/
http://vistahelpca.blogspot.com/




Nonny
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
Re: Firewall etc
Posted: 07-16-2008, 04:34 PM
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 09:20:08 -0700, "Kerry Brown"
<kerry@kdbNOSPAMsys-tems.c*a*m> wrote:
>Personally I use either a hardware firewall or a Linux box as a
>gateway device for doing this kind of stuff. Even most home
> routers have these features now. Use the appropriate tool for
>the job. Software firewalls aren't really the appropriate tool to
>stop malware once it's on your computer.
Hi Kerry,

I am using only my router's firewall. Another "MVP" (don't recall who
it was) advised that people like me should also be running Vista's
firewall for the additional outbound protection.

Your post and another I just read from Ken Blake seems to downplay the
need for ANY kind of outbound protection using the argument that a
good piece of malware can easily bypass such protection.

I think I'm fine with the hardware firewall. Am I correct?
 
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
windows firewall vs MSN Premium's Freedom Security with firewall sue Windows XP Video 0 12-09-2004 04:55 PM
local firewall needed behind hdwr. firewall & LAN PaulG Windows XP New Users 2 04-10-2004 05:40 PM
thirdparty anti virus firewall protec. compatability with XP builtin firewall firewall Windows XP Security & Administration 1 09-15-2003 07:50 PM
windows xp firewall, norton firewall and My Network Places Markk H. Windows XP Security & Administration 2 09-12-2003 05:56 PM
My Yahoo Messenger says I am behind firewall I disabled WinXP Firewall Still .. William Barhorst Windows XP Messenger 0 09-11-2003 07:36 AM