Private FW in bed with ExeRadarPro

[bellgamin]

Originally Posted by Blues7

In addition to "Manual Control" I also have "disable auto-response" and "disable trusted publisher feature" ticked so as to have the most control over PF's responses.
(The "disable trusted publisher feature" is a new option in the most recent version.)

Good comment, Blue. I missed those 2. Have added them. 10Q

[Blues7]

Originally Posted by bellgamin

Good comment, Blue. I missed those 2. Have added them. 10Q

Well, if I can give back just a little, after all your contributions, I'm happy to do so.

Also, I don't know if you do this as well, but I also list my network as "untrusted" by clicking the "sites" button under "network security".

[EASTER]

Just curious but how long do you guys leave the Process Monitor list fill up before "removing" some apps that were just once launched items like certain leaktest files, etc. I don't know how heavy this list might get before it crowds things.

[Blues7]

Originally Posted by EASTER

Just curious but how long do you guys leave the Process Monitor list fill up before "removing" some apps that were just once launched items like certain leaktest files, etc. I don't know how heavy this list might get before it crowds things.

Whenever I do a leak test or some other security related test, I remove the entry immediately afterward. Just a habit of mine to do so.
Since I don't do a lot of testing it's not much of a chore.

I also go through the Process Monitor and Applications from time to time and cull as necessary. (Some old/removed apps have dropped off themselves iirc.)

I'm more inclined to regularly go through the "parents" list as well as the "processes" listed under "advanced - detected applications" to ensure that those apps I don't want to connect outbound are "denied"...and that those processes with internet access are set to "limited".

[EASTER]

Originally Posted by Blues7

Whenever I do a leak test or some other security related test, I remove the entry immediately afterward. Just a habit of mine to do so.
Since I don't do a lot of testing it's not much of a chore.

I also go through the Process Monitor and Applications from time to time and cull as necessary. (Some old/removed apps have dropped off themselves iirc.)

I'm more inclined to regularly go through the "parents" list as well as the "processes" listed under "advanced - detected applications" to ensure that those apps I don't want to connect outbound are "denied"...and that those processes with internet access are set to "limited".

Thanks, a consistent practice that should keep the list from swelling over with uneeded monitored apps.

One quick question on internet limited, what exactly does it limit say when using different browsers, etc.

Appreciate the tips, thanks. Really helpful. Excellent program no doubt.

[Blues7]

Originally Posted by EASTER

Thanks, a consistent practice that should keep the list from swelling over with uneeded monitored apps.

One quick question on internet limited, what exactly does it limit say when using different browsers, etc.

Appreciate the tips, thanks. Really helpful. Excellent program no doubt.

Happy to help where I can though there are others here much more qualified.

It seems like many moons ago that I asked Greg if he and his staff might incorporate the ability to limit an app's rights similar to what is featured with Online Armor's "Run Safer".

When the "limited" rights option was offered in one of the recent versions of PF, the question arose in one of the other threads (from Bill as I recall) as to what was actually "limited".

This was Greg's reply to me via email to that question:

Limited Rights in Privatefirewall is similar to the User Account Control (UAC) provided in Windows 7 (and Vista). It drops Windows process privileges to minimum and disables administrators and power users group memberships in the process token (if current user is a member of one of these groups). “The primary difference between a standard user and an administrator is the level of access that the user has over core, protected areas of the computer. Administrators can change the system state, turn off the firewall, configure security policies, install a service or a driver that affects every user on the computer, and install software for the entire computer. Standard users cannot perform these tasks, and they can only install per-user software.”

I hope this provides at least some helps clarify what is implemented in Privatefirewall. More information regarding UAC is available here:

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/l...(v=ws.10).aspx

I'd recommend addressing any specific questions in that regard directly to Greg.

[EASTER]

Originally Posted by Blues7

I'd recommend addressing any specific questions in that regard directly to Greg.

Since he is that forward with addressing Q's thats a welcome note to keep in mind. Will do.

In addition: Since Privacyware is that accommadating to users interest over their product PFW, maybe all of us users can regularly forward many of our suggestions on other improvements users of PFW could benefit from as well as elevate more interest in PFW on their behalf.

I have some, and i know Bellgamin, Kee's and others including yourself can bring some of our suggestions to be seriously considered maybe. Not that long ago i was under the impression that PFW like many other useful apps might become one of those apps that it's developers might see as lived out it's usefulness.

With some concentrated & persistent continued discussion and suggestions aimed their way, perhaps PFW can evade such a common demise and rise strongly to the forefront of being a very useful solid security solution with an even greater demand and brighter future.

[Blues7]

If these results mean anything, the product is anything but near end of life.

I know from my fairly regular contact with Greg that they are continually striving to make PF better. I think that the rapid development and regular releases are indicative of just that.
(And I know that they are working hard to bring the x64 results up to par with the x86.)

[EASTER]

Originally Posted by Blues7

If these results mean anything, the product is anything but near end of life.

I know from my fairly regular contact with Greg that they are continually striving to make PF better. I think that the rapid development and regular releases are indicative of just that.
(And I know that they are working hard to bring the x64 results up to par with the x86.)

Thanks many times over for the chart URL.

It speaks volumes on it's future IMHO. Quite a result!