navalpatel
join:2003-07-28
Lubbock, TX | Compentant Security At least ZoneAlarm is somewhat competant at what it is designed to do... compared to say anything that Microsoft may make (i.e. Windows firewall). | |
|
 dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Compentant Security said by navalpatel  :
At least ZoneAlarm is somewhat competant at what it is designed to do... compared to say anything that Microsoft may make (i.e. Windows firewall).
There's one in every crowd, huh?
... and it's strange how they usually can't spell. | |
|
 | 
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| Re: Compentant Security said by dave :
There's one in every crowd, huh?
at least he didn't spell "Microsoft" with a $ | |
|
| | 
pcscdma
Chocobo Chocobo Random Battle
Premium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA
clubs: | Re: Compentant Security at least this hasn't turned into a fight between Microsoft and Linu$ Torvald$' wares.
--
Be patriotic or I'm reporting you to Ashcroft. | |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| said by navalpatel :
At least ZoneAlarm is somewhat competant at what it is designed to do... compared to say anything that Microsoft may make (i.e. Windows firewall).
No, XP's firewall did exactly what it was designed to do; block unsolicited incoming connections. It just didn't do what you wanted it to do; block outgoing connections.
--
Japan-- Now with 30% more climbable telephone poles!! | |
|
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs:
| Please give a specific example of what the Windows firewall fails to do. The only thing I can think of is that during startup there's a brief period of exposure before the firewall kicks in. I agree that this is a small problem but it's fixed in SP2.
--
Jimmysquid.com - I take pictures. | |
|
| dave
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-04
not in ohio
·Verizon Online DSL
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Compentant Security said by Rhobite :
Please give a specific example of what the Windows firewall fails to do. The only thing I can think of is that during startup there's a brief period of exposure before the firewall kicks in. I agree that this is a small problem but it's fixed in SP2.
...and it's not clear that ZA does not have the same exposure (see Security forum posts passim). | |
|
| | 
SpitefulCrow
Insert Witty Tag Here
Premium
join:2003-06-04
Berkeley, CA | Re: Compentant Security Yay for system boot procedures that load firewall code and rulesets before any kind of network interface is brought online. 
/linuxrave | |
|
| | |
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
| Re: Compentant Security said by SpitefulCrow :
Yay for system boot procedures that load firewall code and rulesets before any kind of network interface is brought online.
/linuxrave
<xprave>Yah for XP Service Pack 2, which does the same thing</xprave> | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA | Re: Compentant Security <xprave>Yay for firewalls that have more than two users</xprave> | |
|
| | | | | keyboard5684
join:2001-08-01
Youngsville, PA | Windows firewall allows you to modufy it to "open ports" or do what you wish. | |
|
| | | | | |
Steve
I'm a PC, so shut up
Consultant
join:2001-03-10
Yorba Linda, CA
1 edit | Re: Compentant Security said by keyboard5684 :
Windows firewall allows you to modufy it to "open ports" or do what you wish.
The one in XP/SP2: yes. The older firewall really sucked (even though it did what it claimed).
--
Stephen J. Friedl * Security Consultant * Tustin, California USA * my web site | |
|
| | | | | | |
Rhobite
Premium
join:2002-02-24
Cambridge, MA
clubs: | Re: Compentant Security Even the older one lets you open ports individually. | |
|
| | | | | | | |
SpitefulCrow
Insert Witty Tag Here
Premium
join:2003-06-04
Berkeley, CA
| Re: Compentant Security said by Rhobite :
Even the older one lets you open ports individually.
Ooh wow, opening ports. That's so great.
iptables supports connection tracking and customized matching based on almost every field in the packet/frame. | |
|
| | | | | | | | | keyboard5684
join:2001-08-01
Youngsville, PA
 ·Teliax VOIP
 ·WestPAnet Inc.
 ·WestPAnet Inc. CA..
| Re: Compentant Security iptables, a Linux thing. Completely off base. We are not talking about complex firewall operations (which in my opinion the FreeBSD ipfw is far superior to a simple iptables function in linux), we are talking about Windows firewalls.
Zone alarm compared to the Windows firewall that is built in. In my eyes the Windows firewall is better because it shuts up. I do not think you should have to watch a firewall, it should just do its job. How many people go through there firewall logs and actually do something about it?
PIX firewall can track and customize matching/action on every field of the frame. Even a Cisco router can do what you stated without the firewall feature set. Checkpoint firewall can do it all to. I can go on and on about how many different firewall setups are better but since you learned how to write an iptable rule congrats. | |
|
| | | | | | | dumbTNtech
join:2003-04-29
Knoxville, TN
| Say what you will, I've been doing ISP support for four years now and I haven't seen the ICF keep anyone offline. I have seen Zone Alarm suddenly block ALL incoming and outgoing traffic for no apparent reason. Then it's a real pain to remove. The ICF in WindowsXP seems to do a very good job. The only situation where it's not helpful is when you have a trojan on your system letting someone or something in. Of course, that never happens to anyone here.......
--
"Don't try to explain computers to a layman-easier to explain sex to a virgin."-R.A. Heinlein | |
|
|
|
|
|
