kaspersky anti-hacker - my experiences so far

[tahoma]

just got the full version of this baby today. what can i say, im very impressed. full stealth on all test, including all over at pcflank. seems real stable, so i think ill keep using KAH (especially since im already a big fan of their anti-virus)

outpost always served me well, and kah doesent have the outpost plugins, however..its KAH for me from now on i think. very impressed

[Mr.Blaze]

whats it look like is it newby frindly

how stealthy is it

[solarpowered candle]

Thats excellent tahoma, and good query mr blaze, as I have been also looking forewards to hearing about the new release . I run a kaspersky anti virus and would be interested in the firewall . I , even though not skilled to do so , had a go on the beta version some months back, and took it for a spin , but found it very hard to fathom out how to attain stealth . I felt like a fat duck , having a rest on the front lawn of the local Duck shooting club on the first day of duck shooting season .I tried to read the manuel but the info and instructions on debugging or whatever were totally beyond me . Might as well have been written in russian , whilst trying to read it in a snow storm lol. I wrote them and said I would be into it when the new version arrives if they could get a version that was newbie freindly for peoples like me, as there most likely are quite a few of us out there , who could set it up for basic protection "out of the box " till one could study up further . It would be good to know that this is the case , although what maybe a cruise for a novice can be a nightmare for a newbie lol, So if you have the time it would be wonderful to get some feedback on it Tahoma, I thank you, kind regards , Robert

[Mr.Blaze]

solarpowered candle do you know joosky cause you typ like her are you from where shes from im wondering if ever one from where she from all smart

[tahoma]

its got a 'stealth' option, that didnt appear in the beta as far as i can remember. and its achieving stealth everywhere ive tried so far, as opposed to the beta that just achieved 'closed'

[Blackcat]

Tahoma,

I am currently trialling Look 'n' Stop and Outpost as possible firewalls but I am interested in the possibility of Kaspersky AntiHacker. However, I am a bit relunctant as there is no trial version to download and I was 'burnt' by renewing my licence for AVP 3.5 to KAV 4 without trialling; I was disappointed with the newer AntiVirus version for various reasons!!!

Therefore those of us interested in the program can only rely on people like you to inform us of any pros or cons. I am particularly interested in its stability;whether it drains system resources or not and whether it appear to be doing the correct job of a firewall. At the present time would you recommend it, particularly over the free software firewalls presently available?

[tahoma]

doh, wrote a long reply, but forgot to fill in my email and now its all lost. heres an attempted reconstruction;:

rock stable, no crashes.
100% stealth everywhere, every port, except netbios, for which i created a new rule, after applying it, i got stealth on that too.

similar to outpost in the way template rulesets are applied.

uses about 8 mb of resources, doesent slow down MY connection.
lacks features like ad-blocker etc, its a plain pure firewall. and a damn good one.

dont blame me if u buy it and find its not meetnig your demands, but based on my experiences its the very best out and out firewall.

i used outpost for a long time, and i miss outposts plugins, but KAH is more stable, less unpredictable. moving from outpost to KAH was a bit like moving from a very capable but unstable product from a relatively unknown manufacturer, to a product u can trust 100% all the time, but lacking a bit in features.

so YES, i recommend it. maybe running it along side smt like proximitron, or perhaps another firewall (like zap) is a good idea, i dont know, didnt try.

my new configureation of KAH + drweb is a lot faster and more stable than outpost + kaspersky anti-virus which i used until recently..

ill post it here if i discover any vulnerabilities or anything else worth reporting

[Technodrome]

KAH is good!!! But its a memory hog,just like KAV 4! It uses 14 MB + of memory!


Technodrome

[solarpowered candle]

Thanks tahoma for your words. look forewards to hearing how it all flows.

Hey mr blaze, thank you for the compliment , but alas I do not know joosky , however i would really like too lol as she is one real sweety. nor do i reside in the same part of the world as her , but live down under in new zealand,
kind regards to you, Robert

[solarpowered candle]

Well i downloaded it today and it is a really nice simple pure firewall. It runs sweetly so far and even though i drive a model T , my wind 95 32 ram antique hums along. In fact i have never been able to run my kav lite anti virus monitor in the past as it was like towing a train but for some reason its all going with the flow and my pc is really feeling nice an quick. Its easy to run straight from download and the only setting that i needed to check was to enable stealth mode . If my machine doesnt blow up tonight i will be a happy fellow and i really feel comfortable , for the first time with a simple combined anti virus and firewall solution that i actually feel secure with, cool aye lol , regards Robert

[Blackcat]

Purchased AntiHacker for my daughter's computer which is part of a small LAN when she is away at University.

Initial reactions were favorable; fast, stable and good for both newbies and experienced people with software firewalls. However, while testing the program over at PC Flank it passed all tests except the STEALTH TEST- where it failed all 5 mini-tests!!!!! The computer is a laptop running WinXP, and the XP Firewall is turned off.

I tried 'Shields Up' testing program and AntiHacker passed here. I have switched on 'stealth mode' on the program so something is going wrong somewhere. ???

[Blackcat]

Wearing my glasses this time PC Flank is not reporting my correct IP address!!!! so it is this site which is not reporting correctly the stealth tests on Antihacker. Have tried some more tests, including Steve Gibson's site and the program passes all tests ;D.

Assuming the PC Flank result was wrong, Antihacker appears a very nice program. Although at times it uses about 11mB of memory it appears not to slow down the system at all, easy to use and a nice interface. Would appear to be good choice for the newbie ( just set up and tick stealth mode) and the more experienced person. Kaspersky appears to have a very good program here which appears much better than their KAV 4 AV program. Highly recommended.

[GiannMike]

Hi All! I too purchased Kaspersky Anti-Hacker today and I must admit, this is a great firewall for the beginner and I also assume for the advanced user. I get stealth all over at every scan site that have been mentioned on this board. My problem is almost like that of Blackcat, all stealth except stealth tests at Pc Flank except that for me the website is reporting the correct IP address. Is this anything to worry about and how can I stealth these tests? Is their any rules that I can create to stealth them? Thanks

[CrazyM]

-{ Quote: " quoting: GiannMike link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=0#36952 date=1040415921]
My problem is almost like that of Blackcat, all stealth except stealth tests at Pc Flank except that for me the website is reporting the correct IP address. Is this anything to worry about and how can I stealth these tests? Is their any rules that I can create to stealth them? Thanks
" }-
It is not anything to worry about. Just a closed response instead of stealth to those particular types of scans. You are still secure.

As for rules or settings that may stealth you to these types of scans, hopefully some of the new users of this firewall might be able to help out. You could try sending an email to Kapersky support and inquire if it can deal with these types of scans.

Regards,
CrazyM

[Blackcat]

Tahoma

You mention in your thread that you obtained stealth in all the sites you tested. Did you test at PC Flank?

As it now appears that I am not the only one that has tried AntiHacker at this site and failed the stealth test, I would be very interested in any rules you have set up with this program.

If I have time I might try and send an e-mail to Kaspersky support. However, I am still not convinced it is a failing of the program- the testing procedure at pcflank is more likely ???

[MikeGiann]

Hi! I have sent an email to Kaspersky Labs support earlier this morning, as soon as I get an answer I'll post it here. In the meantime if anyone else has tested this and received the same response, please let us and Kaspersky's Lab know. Thanks. :)

Mike

[JacK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: CrazyM link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=0#36955 date=1040416950]

It is not anything to worry about. Just a closed response instead of stealth to those particular types of scans. You are still secure.

As for rules or settings that may stealth you to these types of scans, hopefully some of the new users of this firewall might be able to help out. You could try sending an email to Kapersky support and inquire if it can deal with these types of scans.

Regards,
CrazyM
" }-

Hi,

I second that blocked or closed is not a security issue but AFM I prefer a total control and to be stealth or closed on a per port basis at whim according to my present needs. I played a few hours with KAH and I never achieved to be stealth on PCFlank and gave up : back to KPF or OP on my machines.
Eager to know KAH answer and how to be stealth .
Seems to me a lack of features for advanced users in KHA but I didn't study it to closely and I may be wrong.

Notice that being stealth is not always due to the FW, some ISP's set you in stealth mode without your own FW intervention :)
It might be why Blackcat passes PCFlank tests with flying colours but the others.

Rgds,

[solarpowered candle]

I tried to do the test at flanks yesterday with KAV anti hack but all i got was that they are unable to proceed due to either my isp proxy or due to me running a firewall. I tried at Black cat but nothing would happen there so i went to Sygates , and although this scan does not have the highest star rating from this site , I tested my Kav out on all the scans available and got a 100%ok. So thats a start lol. Maybe i will try a few this eve after dinner and see what gives else where . Im not to knowing about these scan sites but do wonder if one or two are a little biased towards there particular favourite product. For me I wouldnt care what pc flank said . But if i did not achieve stealth on some of the lesser , so called sites I would be concerned. My feeling is that clickin stealth enables stealth totally , but we shall soon see if we all hit up enough sites each and put in our findings . regards Robert

[Blackcat]

Have tried several more sites and all give clean bill of health with AntiHacker. Will try more extensive testing with information provided by Tassie_Devils in one of my other threads in Firewalls. Retried PC Flank and this time it did give a correct IP address but it still failed on all the stealth tests.

Have also sent e-mails to Kaspersky, both in Russia and the UK; waiting for response.

Those of us with this firewall should have a better idea of its effectiveness if we carry on pooling our results. Keep testing!!!! ;)

[GiannMike]

Well, I received an answer from Kaspersky's Lab and boy what a tech support they are.
First reply that I received is that the technical support technician could not find the "stealth scan" on PC Flank's website, so I emailed them the exact link and described in detail what the procedure for the scan was and this is what they sent me as a reply:

" Dear Sir,

Unfortunately, we dont use such online scanners.

Sincerely yours,
Saphia Rahimova
____________________________________________
Technical support /Kaspersky Lab Ltd
E-mail: support@kaspersky.com;
http://www.kaspersky.com; http://www.viruslist.com
Secure your cyberspace! "

Man, is this lame or what! Anyway I guess the people that bought this Anti-Hacker will be on their own to figure things out. This serves me right for buying a version 1.0 of a product and without trialing it out first, oh wait, there was no trial of this, I guess I now know why. I bought it in hopes that these people tested it first before selling it as a complete verson 1.0 and also because of their reputation for being the best at what they do and not giving an answer as the one mentioned above. I now hope the refund will go as smoothly as the purchase - but I won't hold my breath for that. Merry Christmas everyone. :)

[Luthorcrow]

Ya, I don't trust any company that doesn't allow a trial run.

[solarpowered candle]

wow Giannemike thats a mean reply to you lol. I wonder about wether there english is that crash hot as i had fun with there labs a few months back and still cant fathom the emails out lol. However when it was all said an done i am happy with my kaspersky anti virus , which was what it was all about . Im wondering if what they are saying here is that they dont hold that site in any credible light as to there findings , anyways im gonna keep my kav anti hacker and go with it as im not having any problems with it , but good luck with your refund . regards Robert

[devilhawk42420]

I just e-mailed Kaspersky support about the problem with the PC Flank stealth test - on my system, KAH passes the UDP portion of the test, but fails the TCP. Is this what everyone else is experiencing?

[Jonas]

I know this may seem like a stupid question but...have any of you tried Sygate Persoanl Firewall? Their firewall has a smaller footprint and is VERY user friendly, even blocks Netbios and allows for even email alerts and stealth browsing (not the same as usign a Proxy). Iam surprized more people aren't talking about Sygate bu tif your looking for a firewall they have both the free version and the professional and trials.

Best wishes,
Jonas

[solarpowered candle]

thats not a stupid question Jonas, sygates is a great firewall as many here would testify, na some of us are just laydowns when it comes to picking up new toys lol, thank god i dont go to timeshare presentations . I just wanted to buy my pc a xmas pressy . have a peaceful xmas, kind regards , robert

[MikeGiann]

Hi devilhawk42420,

That is what I'm talking about (and I assume the others, but I don't want to jump to any conclusions). I pass the UDP scan but the remaining 4 TCP scans are non-stealth. I haven't made up my mind if I'll ask for the refund yet, but knowing me I'll probably follow CrazyM's advise and not worry about it to much as non-stealth just means they are closed and not open. As more people purchase the software and report to Kav's Lab, they'll probably have it fixed in no time at all. Hopefully! ???

[root]

I do not want to start another long running thread about whether stealth is important or not, but I want to point out something.
If a firewall claims it will stealth your machine, and yet some port show as closed, then the firewall is not behaving as advertised and there may be some concern as to why?
If you go to a scan site and most of the ports show stealth and a couple show closed, why is that?
Just as an example, I help people with Outpost. Outpost claims it will stealth your machine. If someone comes to the board and says all my ports are stealth except for port xxx, then I know there is a problem. Period. It can be fixed by changing some rule, or finding some other problem The only alternative is that Outpost will not work properly on that machine.
If a firewall makes no claim for providing stealth, then choose it if you like. I would not, but that is a matter of personal choice. At least it is probably working as advertised.
I hope people understand what I'm saing here. The issue is not if stealth is necessary or not. The issue is, is the firewall performing as it is supposed to?

[devilhawk42420]

Hi Mike,

That's exactly what I'm getting with KAH as well. In my e-mail to Kaspersky support, I directed them to this thread - hopefully they'll see they need to get this fixed. I'll post any response I receive here. (As someone who actually works in software tech support, I was very appalled at their response to you!)

[Smokey]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Blackcat link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=0#36916 date=1040404258]
Purchased AntiHacker for my daughter's computer which is part of a small LAN when she is away at University.

Initial reactions were favorable; fast, stable and good for both newbies and experienced people with software firewalls. However, while testing the program over at PC Flank it passed all tests except the STEALTH TEST- where it failed all 5 mini-tests!!!!! The computer is a laptop running WinXP, and the XP Firewall is turned off.

I tried 'Shields Up' testing program and AntiHacker passed here. I have switched on 'stealth mode' on the program so something is going wrong somewhere. ???
" }-

Read the Articles Library on PC Flank: http://www.pcflank.com/art27.htm

[solarp[owered candle]

You are quite right Root , that is the issue as the product is claiming full stealth, and apparantly it is not happening with tcp from pc flanks, although on some sites it is fine. I wrote to kaspersky late last nite (my time ) and had received a reply within a few hours that was
Dear Robert,
Can you please describe me all characteristics of your PC. What software
is installed? What is your OS?
If there are any error messages appears?
I'm looking forward to hearing from you.
Best regards,
Sergey Novikov___________________________________________
Technical support /Kaspersky Lab Ltd
10, Geroyev Panfilovtsev Str., 125363, Moscow, Russia
E-mail: service@kaspersky.com;
http://www.kaspersky.com; http://www.viruslist.com
Secure your cyberspace!
This was a kindly response compared to an earlier cposting by (I think ) Giannmikes.
I have replied , as i have very little running on this system, and shall see what they say. I just wish i could access more scan sites but i seem to be limited here (definitely cant get into flanks ), where as those that i can such as sygates and Shields up give a 100% I feel that when they do tidy up this matter , it will be a great pure an simple firewall , I shall post their response.

[devilhawk42420]

Well, I finally got a response from Kaspersky support - and it was virtually identical to the one GiannMike received - 'unfortunately, we do not use such online scanners.'

My refund request has already been submitted.

[Smokey]

-{ Quote: " quoting: root link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=15#37340 date=1040658049]
I do not want to start another long running thread about whether stealth is important or not, but I want to point out something.

I hope people understand what I'm saing here. The issue is not if stealth is necessary or not. The issue is, is the firewall performing as it is supposed to?
" }-

I agree 100%!

[solarpowered candle]

For anyone who may be interested I have received another email today concerning the stealth problems from Kaspersky labs . It reads

Dear Sir,

This version of Kaspersky Anti Hacker is the first version. I forward the description of this progblem and we will correct this.

Sincerely yours,
Saphia Rahimova
____________________________________________
Technical support /Kaspersky Lab Ltd
Tel.: +7 095 797 87 07; Fax: +7 095 797 87 00;
E-mail: support@kaspersky.com;
http://www.kaspersky.com; http://www.viruslist.com
Secure your cyberspace!


Im still hanging onto mine lol, Regards an a peaceful new year,
Robert

[Twisted EndZ]

I'm having a real bad problem with anti-hacker. When I first install it, it ran fine. Then I got a new video card so I decided to reinstall windows 98SE. When I installed all the drivers I installed Norton av 2003 pro and then Anti-hacker right after. Now when I tried an load IE it AH asks if I want IE to access the internet and I say YES and to always allow it. But it won't connect to any site. I installed other programs and they all work on the net (getright, norton live reg, outlook express etc...). I tried to goto the internet settings and configure they way I connect to the internet (lan), I changed all the security settings back to normal (AH changed them to custom). I also tried closing down AH and trying IE and it still won't show a web page. I also removed norton av 2003 pro and AH from the start up and still nothing different. As soon as I uninstall AH and reboot the system, IE works perfectly. I also have all the current updates for Win98SE. Anybody know what it could be, I've tried lots of things and still nothing. I really liked AH (I usually use Sygate Pro) and want to continue to use it. Thanks.

[steve]

I had to uninstall Sygate firewall after installing KAH in order get access the net. If you have it or another firewall installed, try uninstalling them. Simply disabling them would not work for me, I had to totally uninstall them.

[GeN]

Hello everyone !
I've installed KAH on my computer. Then I decided to check it by pcflank site.
And to my surprise I found out that my computer was absolutely stealthed !!!
All test had been passed successfully !!!

Maybe I've got a bad link to pcflank, but I tested it several times...
Well ... KAH seems to be a very nice firewall, and I'll recommend to to all my friends :-)))

best regards,
GeN.

[JacK]

-{ Quote: " quoting: GeN link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=30#41608 date=1042408401]
Hello everyone !
I've installed KAH on my computer. Then I decided to check it by pcflank site.
And to my surprise I found out that my computer was absolutely stealthed !!!
All test had been passed successfully !!!

Maybe I've got a bad link to pcflank, but I tested it several times...
Well ... KAH seems to be a very nice firewall, and I'll recommend to to all my friends :-)))

best regards,
GeN.
" }-

Hello,

Which OS ? If WinXP and ICF is running too, you are stealth KAH or no KAH.

Could you test without KAH and see whether you are stealth ?

There are some ISP which give you a stealth result without any FW too.

AFAIK the problem about stealth is still pending with KAH.

Rgds,

[Blackcat]

Well it must be at least 3 weeks since I contacted Kaspersky with the problem of non-stealthing. I have sent 7 e-mails in total to kaspersky both here and in the UK, using both official and unofficial contact addresses. I have yet to receive a reply :'( :-[. This together with their so called support forum at kaspersky.com for their antivirus programs where there is no one from kaspersky actually offering support means in general their support to individual customers is a joke >:(.

Since I consider support to be a vital part of the package for any decision about buying software I will definitely not renew my licence for either KAV4 or AntiHacker this year. They give a very good impression of not caring about their customer base( unless of course you are a big corporate client) >:(

In addition the quality of their products is slipping compared to other similar programs e.g. NOD32 and LookNStop. Bye Bye Kaspersky.

[solarpowered candle]

Yes Its a shame that such a company treats us lowely souls with such an attitude , Although i have had better luck with some commumication , it does not go far enough , I also requested from Element 5 yesterday a refund for my anti-hacker (and received it within a few short hours - excellent support and service from them )
Look @stop looks good lol. For the mo Im enjoying outpost and with its plugins its really good. My KAV lite is still doing the job , but will await the next Nod version and also check that one out as its pretty light and fast so they say .

[eyespy]

Hi all !
Since KAH is relatively new, support may be hard to find for a while; ie..forums, etc.
If it stays around for a while, I'm sure their will be more support to be found around the net !!
I tried the Beta version a while back and it didn't suit me, but it sounds as though the proggie you users now have seems different from the Test version I tried!!

Regards,
bill ;)

[solarpowered candle]

Hi Bill , As appearances go , they have added a stealth mode to the KAH which was not in the Betta version. Just a shame it does not fully work. However they did say that they are looking into to it. Dont think theres much diffirence otherwise to the Betta version apart from that
regards , Robert

[GeN]

imagine IP address of a Hacker. (H)
H. tries to scan My computer. (M)
H will never see M unless M establishes connect to H.

So.
1. if M establishes connect to Some Host (S) -> both of them will be able to send data each other.
2. If M doesnt establish connect to S , S will never see M.

Well... and this site ... You make connection to it first. Just to get pages from it. And when you press "scan me pleeeeease !!" -> you establish connection. So it's natural, that KAH believe you connect an ordinary computer, not a HACKER !!! :-)))
Imagine the situation, when hacker is sitting and dringing a cup of tea (or something), and in this very moment a USER asks him : "Dear Hacker ! My IP is XXXXX. Please, scan me please !"
It's nonsence ! :-)))

[root]

Hi GeN. Evidently you are not familiar with some of the concepts involved in testing one's computer for stealthed or closed ports.
I will try to explain the basics here.
When you click on a bookmark or type in an url to go to a website, your computer sends out pakets of information to that website, basically saying knock knock, let me in. The website will then send packets of information back to your computer and say sure, come on in. How can I help you.
When you have a firewall on your computer, set to monitor traffic, it sees the initial packets go out to xyz website, and expects to see packets returned from xyz.
Now, when you go to a site that is going to scan your defenses for weaknesses, the initial conversations are same as any other website.
BUT, when you hit scan me, that website then starts sending various packets of information at your computer on various ports, that was not replies to anything. In other words, unsolicited connection attempts. Your firewall sees these packets trying to get in, and if the firewall is supposed to stealth your computer, it will just log those connection attempts and drop the packets, so nothing goes back to the website. If the packets are returned to the website, with a hello, then that port is considered open. If the firewall returns the packets, but with a message that the port is not available, then the port is considered closed.
The concept of going to certain sites that can scan your ports to see if you have any open doors to the internet is an old and accepted part of people using the results to judge how well their firewall is doing.
If you still feel this is not a satifactory method of testing firewalls, please, let me know and we can discuss.

[solarpowered candle]

Hello Igor , I am hoping you may be able to help us with some of the many questions that this thread has generated regarding the protection that KAH gives ,as for many users we choose to operate a firewall in full stealth and our testings at various sites have shown that KAH has not yet achieved this level of security for us , can you enlighten us with this , and what one may need to do to attain this , Thanks, Robert

[Blackcat]

I have just received an e-mail to-day from Lisa Clancy the main support person at Kaspersky UK.

After considerable testing, Kaspersky did find a fault with the stealth mode of AntiHacker but they have now rectified the problem. It will now pass all stealth tests including those over at PC Flank. 8)

There will therefore be a new version of Antihacker released - version 1.5- after some more testing and with some new features added.

See my latest thread for more detail. And a big thanks to Lisa who passed on all our moans and complaints to Kaspersky in Russia.

[greenze]

KAH failed so of the tests ...at the sygate online security check ...ie ...NETBIOS protection ....and more ........ :-*

[GeN]

Hey guys !
I've got the driver that provides full stealth mode !!
I could upload it to ftp-site or I could send it by email ...
Are you interested ? :-))

[Blackcat]

GeN


A number of us would be very interested in this 'stealth' driver. Is it Kaspersky certified?

Can I ask where you originally obtained it? And therefore provide this URL?

Otherwise probably best to load it to a ftp-site as there may be many requests?

[GeN]

the driver is REAL. It hasnt been fully tested, but I suppose this driver will be in 1.5 version.
(or maybe with minimal changes).
If you wish to wait for 1.5 version - it's up to you...
I can tell you the changes from previous version driver.

1. ADSL support.
2. two additional attack prevention (SMBDIE, Helkern). There will be just a notification without specification. (User app needs to be modified ...)
3. Updated stealth algorithm

regards, GeN.

[Tinribs]

I suggest thar anyone interested in this new driver waits until official word is given, Blackcat has already approached Kaspersky with reference to this and word should be forthcoming soon.

I'm not doubting its validity but its best to be safe rather than sorry ;)

[wizard]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Blackcat link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=45#52173 date=1047402015]A number of us would be very interested in this 'stealth' driver." }-

Why? 'Stealth' is nothing but marketing hype. It does not bring any additional security (or value). ???

wizard

[wizard]

-{ Quote: " quoting: GeN link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=45#52181 date=1047404297]
the driver is REAL. " }-

So why is this driver not officially published by Kaspersky? And where did you get this file from. If you want to share this file please provide a reliable download source for it, e.g. the path of the Kaspersky ftp-server.

wizard

[solarpowered candle]

mmmmm a little sus there GeN ::) No one we have asked at KL seems to know much about it . although we know its soon to be released

[GeN]

Well ... I have some kind of connection with KAH driver developer. I know almost everything about it.
As to me, I'm using new driver already... And I dont have any problems discussed in this forum any more. 8)

Heh... Anyway as far as I understood, you're not interested. Then wait for 1.5 version. I guess it'll be released in couple of weeks.

[solarpowered candle]

cool. i will just keep sitting on the porch without no shoes picking the base singing the blues 8)

[Smokey]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Technodrome link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=0#36605 date=1040230853]
KAH is good!!! But its a memory hog,just like KAV 4! It uses 14 MB + of memory!


Technodrome
" }-

And that is and (always???) will be the Kasperky problem:

very good programs, but they are all memory hogs...

[GeN]

You're not right here ...
At my PC KAH uses 3980K of memory ...

(ICQ - 13432K ...)
So I dont think KAH eats too much memory ...

[Tinribs]

So Gen, considering Kaspersky have no word about this 'new driver' from several sources, how did you manage to come by it?
You say you have connections with programmers?
If you would be so kind as to mail me this 'driver' I'd be keen to have a look at it

[GeN]

yes ... I could send It to you...
write me email to gengen#mail.ru (#->@) and I'll give you the driver ...
or tell me your email ...

[GeN]

-{ Quote: " quoting: GeN link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=45#52232 date=1048062332]
Well ... I have some kind of connection with KAH driver developer. I know almost everything about it.
As to me, I'm using new driver already... And I dont have any problems discussed in this forum any more. 8)

Heh... Anyway as far as I understood, you're not interested. Then wait for 1.5 version. I guess it'll be released in couple of weeks.
" }-

It seems to me that couple of weeks was too optimistic ...
Officials says KAH 1.5 is to be released in June ... But I can inform you, that KAH 1.5 is in BUG-fix stage now ...
sorry for misinformation ::)

[controler]

I tried KAV's Beta firewall along time ago, when they had it posted on their site. Then they closed the Beta and released the firewall.
Are you saying there is still a beta out there or that they shouldn't have released their beta so soon?


con

[solarpowered candle]

As appearances go they stopped the Beta and started selling the 1.0 version which had lots of small problems. I remember Igor from KL saying at the kav ice forum sometime ago that there will be a release again of another beta version of KAH sometime before the next version and this maybe be around the time of the KAV 5.0 Beta anti virus release. Whether they do this or not remains to be seen . But it was not a cool move really to release and sell a firewall that was not what it should be and is really in beta mode as they did . Maybe they needed funds for research lol. Maybe thats why they want to run the internet liscencing department . :)

[GeN]

-{ Quote: " quoting: controler link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=60#54458 date=1050063022]
I tried KAV's Beta firewall along time ago, when they had it posted on their site. Then they closed the Beta and released the firewall.
Are you saying there is still a beta out there or that they shouldn't have released their beta so soon?


con
" }-

I mean, that 1.5 version is it be released in June. There is no beta-version any more.
1.5 version has several additinoal features and fixed bugs. But everything should be tested carefully. You dont want unstable product, do you ? :-)

by the way, you may suggest something to be included in 2.0 version ... and it could really be included. it's not a joke ! 8)

[FireDancer]

-{ Quote: " quoting: root link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=15#msg37340 date=1040658049]

I hope people understand what I'm saing here. The issue is not if stealth is necessary or not. The issue is, is the firewall performing as it is supposed to?
" }-

Hi Root and everyone else

There are some great firewalls and some not so great firewalls out there and I am definatley not a pro in the area but I belive if a person takes time to investigate and make a informed desicion about software such as whats good and whats not before just installing it, and running it, then it comes to the question of, is that person useing the software right ? (controling the firewall and making rules)

Isnt a fire wall only as good as the rules that are written for it by the user?

I use Kerio 2.1.5 and pass all stealth test at www.pcflank.com

Regards,
FireDancer

[GeN]

KAH Beta-verision is updated at Kaspersky ftp-server ...
you may download it and test a little ... :-)

[Lisa]

Hi,
Just to clarify, KAH version 1.5 is in beta at the moment tests are ok on Win 2000/XP still issues on Win98.

It is due for release 25th of September.

Regards

Lisa
KL UK

[Paul Wilders]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Lisa link=board=23;threadid=5549;start=60#msg81504 date=1061457435]
Hi,
Just to clarify, KAH version 1.5 is in beta at the moment tests are ok on Win 2000/XP still issues on Win98.

It is due for release 25th of September.

Regards

Lisa
KL UK
" }-

Thanks for the update, Lisa ;)

regards.

paul

[Lisa]

You're welcome Paul ;D ;D