Your opinion on KIS 2009 firewall not stealthing

[dread]

Is stealth really that important to you? Do you feel safer with stealthed ports instead of closed ports? KIS 2009 does not stealth all ports now. What do you think and do you feel less safe cause of this? Are you going to reconsider buying KIS cause of this?

[subset]

Hi,

I never used Stealth mode, because p2p clients did never work with this mode.
Other peers where not able to connect to my PC.

This seems also to be the official motive for skipping the Stealth mode, full support for p2p clients out of the box.
http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=66402&st=0&p=611030&#entry611030

Never used it and will not miss it. :)

Cheers

[Mrkvonic]

Hello,

Why should a fully stealthed firewall interfere with emule or anything? You simply set a pair of advanced rules for the p2p ports or forward them through your router, problem solved.

Unless we're talking about some default settings, where the average joe has no clue how to allow incoming connections?

Mrk

[Ed_H]

{QUOTE-> Is stealth really that important to you? Do you feel safer with stealthed ports instead of closed ports? KIS 2009 does not stealth all ports now. What do you think and do you feel less safe cause of this? Are you going to reconsider buying KIS cause of this? <-QUOTE}

I am using KIS 2009 (8.0.0.357 TR) with Vista HP SP1 and all ports are stealthed according to GRC.com. All firewall settings are at default.

[dread]

{QUOTE-> I am using KIS 2009 (8.0.0.357 TR) with Vista HP SP1 and all ports are stealthed according to GRC.com. All firewall settings are at default. <-QUOTE}

That might be true but they did away with stealth mode. Look here (http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=68784&view=findpost&p=632985) or just browse their forums.

[lodore]

{QUOTE-> I am using KIS 2009 (8.0.0.357 TR) with Vista HP SP1 and all ports are stealthed according to GRC.com. All firewall settings are at default. <-QUOTE}
then again they could be the firewall in your router.

[Baz_kasp]

Stealth is a gimmic and I have never seen any use for it.

If a hacker really wants to penetrate your pc he will do it regardless of "stealth".... and I see a lot of people enquiring about connectivity problems....turns out because "stealth" was turned on.

BTW KL have not "done away" with stealth, just changed the way it operates.

You can change the packet rules in order to become "stealthed" as described here: http://forum.kaspersky.com/index.php?showtopic=68104&view=findpost&p=626772

[Ed_H]

{QUOTE-> then again they could be the firewall in your router. <-QUOTE}

You are probably correct...forgot about the router.

[TonyW]

{QUOTE-> Stealth is a gimmic and I have never seen any use for it. <-QUOTE}
That maybe so, but the problem is if we are to believe the principle of stealth is outdated today, as I said in the KL forums, whether you use the KIS firewall or not (either to block incoming TCP/UDP streams or block by application rule), those that have a router with its own firewall will invariably find themselves stealthed anyway at sites like grc.com.

The average Joe who does read something about computer security will think they are good to go when they see all green. I disabled my router's firewall as a test, and I was still stealthed at the aforementioned site. I learnt about changing DMZ settings to take control away from the router's firewall on these very forums.

To be honest, I haven't done so yet because my particular router advises using DMZ only as a temporary measure for troubleshooting purposes. Besides that, I would not be protected from its firewall and would not receive automatic upgrades to the router by using this feature.

It is down to choice I suspect. I could utilise DMZ and rely totally on KIS' firewall or I could use the router firewall plus KIS with its ability to keep track of outbound connections, something my router firewall cannot do.

Edit: added note

[dread]

Not exactly what I looking for so I will tell you what I think. Yes I feel more secure when my ports are stealthed. But I know it does not matter as long as they are closed. I know kinda of stupid but thats how I feel lol. No this will not have any impact if I do or do not buy KIS again.

[chrisretusn]

{QUOTE-> Is stealth really that important to you? Do you feel safer with stealthed ports instead of closed ports? KIS 2009 does not stealth all ports now. What do you think and do you feel less safe cause of this? Are you going to reconsider buying KIS cause of this? <-QUOTE}
Stealth is not important to me.

I feel just as safe with closed or stealth ports.

I do not use KIS 2009, but I would feel just as safe.

That would not stop me from considering KIS, in fact I would consider it a plus.

[solarpowered candle]

I can remember the first versions of KIS , how the ports were not stealthed. It was perfectly safe as they were closed. However as kaspersky av was becoming increasingly more popular amongst home users and forums such as these , they stealthed the next versions which was proberbly good marketing sense at the time. Interesting that they are returning to closed again.

[Baldrick]

{QUOTE-> I can remember the first versions of KIS , how the ports were not stealthed. It was perfectly safe as they were closed. However as kaspersky av was becoming increasingly more popular amongst home users and forums such as these , they stealthed the next versions which was proberbly good marketing sense at the time. Interesting that they are returning to closed again. <-QUOTE}
The reason for this is to make the application more user friendly for p2p users. The default is that but it is very simple to change a couple of settings to get full 'stealth' readings back...if that is what floats your boat?;D

[DVD+R]

Never mind the stealthing bit, it that Emulator thing that says everythings a Virus :o Idiots need to be thrashed for releasing a public candidate like this >:(

[Baldrick]

{QUOTE-> Never mind the stealthing bit, it that Emulator thing that says everythings a Virus :o Idiots need to be thrashed for releasing a public candidate like this >:( <-QUOTE}
Not anymore it does not, certainly not on my setup. There was an issue. This is unfortunate and it was corrected very quickly. You IMHO were just unlucky in terms of timing...but then again this is still a beta even if a Technical (not Public) Release...and as with all betas one uses them at one own risk. C'est la vie beta!;)