Do you install a 3rd party firewall?

[HKEY1952]

Originally Posted by Cutting_Edgetech

There's no one answer that is right for your question. Yes, and no. It all depends on how sensitive the data you have is. Speaking for myself, i'm fire walled to death considering i'm behind a UTM appliance, and using Online Armor. I'm using Online Armor for leak protection, but no software firewall is going to be able to filter inbound traffic as well as my UTM. Strictly speaking of a software FW without the hardware.

The question for the Poll is: Do you install a 3rd party firewall?

One of the single answers alone, either YES or NO, is the right answer to the Polls question, sensitivity of the
data is irrelevent to the question. One either installs an third party firewall or one does not install an third
party firewall. You have installed an third party firewall, Online Armor.

You have also deployed Gateway Security by installing an Unified Threat Management (UTM) Appliance at the Networks
Edge, the NETGEAR PROSECURE UTM25, that is designed for Small and Medium-sized Business(es) with an minimum cost
of $331.02 US Dollars for an one year license key. Whether you own an Small or Medium-sized Business or deploying
the NETGEAR PROSECURE UTM25 for Home Use is irrelevant.

What is relevant in regards to the NETGEAR PROSECURE UTM25 is its performance in comparison to Home Use verses
Small Business or Enterprise Use. In short, the key disadvantages of Unified Threat Management at the perimeter are:
An single point of failure for network traffic
An single point of compromise if the Unified Threat Management has vulnerabilities
An potential impact on latency and bandwidth when the Unified Threat Management cannot keep up with the traffic

The above disadvantages are most prominent for Small, Medium, and Enterprise entities, and for Home Networks the
above disadvantages are almost nil.

YES, it is good practice to have an local firewall enabled on each computer behind the Unified Threat Management
Appliance for added security, as you have done with Online Armor.

You have an very secure setup Cutting_Edgetech, expensive, but secure.

The simplest and most reliable firewall rule is to allow all outbound traffic and block all inbound traffic.


HKEY1952

[EboO]

I'm not alone, great news

My pc is up to date, with safe programs so i think outbound will bring more difficulties than protection. I'll need to configure it (and allow all programs...) for being quite. And if i install a malware what will happen ? Will it warn about connection or not (if the malware uses authorised application for connecting) ?
Is outbound protection is a more in security or not (regarding the necessity of configuring firewall) ?

Thanks.

[Amit]

Originally Posted by EboO

Who uses the firewall for inbound only ?

Thanks.

I'm using xp fw for inbound and wsa fw for outbound.....

[majoMo]

Since I like to have outbound control [to avoid things like AskToolbar in installations, etc.], I use:

Win XP - Windows 7 Firewall Control FREE (Sphinx)
Win 7 - Windows Firewall Control (BiniSoft.org)

Native Windows Firewall always activated.

[Escalader]

Originally Posted by mack_guy911

i go for 3rd party because of ease of use and more power of other things like hips sandbox .,.......etc

but main reason ease of use i been using outpost/KIS from 7-8 years now kinda familiar thats the only reason

I'm just now running the latest OP FW Pro 7.5.2 which I installed and this time did not install their version of a antispyware and the web control feature, more of a basic 2 way FW with HIPS and some ip blocking feature.
The malware and web control I pick up with Nod32 V5. Less overlap.
Things are much snappier now.

Not trying to sell you guys anything here just describing what I've got. I can easily block some applications from access to www.

[AMIGA500]

Originally Posted by HKEY1952

No, the Microsoft Windows built-in firewall is quite adequate.

If I were to install an third party firewall it would be Agnitum Outpost Firewall Pro,

and occasionally I do install it, to keep abreast with its technology.


HKEY1952

Is there any particular reason why you would choose outpost over other firewalls just out of curiousity.

thanks.

[Amit]

Online Armour.

Windows FW is enough

[AMIGA500]

i use online armor or comodo firewall.
But i prefer online armor as i consider it a more user friendly program and i love it.
its all down to the personal preferences of the end user.

[Mild_Manered]

My router, Sandboxie, and a decent adblocker is all I use and need on XP. Before I had a router, I use to frequently get hit with malware and I even had an AV and Firewall which didn't stop most malware. The worst malware my system got was a worm and it fried windows in a few minutes time. Since I got a router I very rarely get hit with malware. I believe once sophisticated malware gets through your AV and 3rd part firewall, that it's probably too late anyway for the average user, and best to put a new image on or in my case, reformat and reinstall windows which I enjoy doing anyway.

[Creer]

Windows Vista/7 FW in most cases is enough, but to tell the truth I feel naked with this kind of firewall. I need complex command center where I can do things with FW whatever I'd like to do. I need full logs from FW console where I can see drivers logs or network stats sorted by protocols with all (created by me) rules highlighted.
But it's just me

[Amit]

I do install 3rd party firewall but not installed right now. Just my XP firewall.