ESS Firewall - service/domain name rules (ex: Windows Update)

Hello all,
I plan to switch from EAV to ESS on a Windows 7 (64b) home local network but a thing bothers me:

I know that the Windows Firewall service rules are not truly linked to services (set of rules, from what i read on the web ... beyond my knowledges) but as an exemple, my Windows Update rule with the Windows Firewall is :

• Outbound TCP:80, 443 for svchost.exe bound with Windows Update service, allowed.

Works fine and others services that uses svchost (netsvcs) like BITS are blocked (WAN).

In fine, is there a way to make the same thing with ESS (or another firewall) ?

Nota: As an alternative, i tried to add specific domain names like *windowsupdate.microsoft.com, *.update.microsoft.com ... in an ESS firewall rule but only IP seems to be permitted (as i understand).

Perhaps I'm on a wrong way, could you light my way ?

Sorry for my poor English, not my natural language !
Have a nice day.

 

The following KB Article might help:

kb.eset.com/esetkb/index?page=content&id=SOLN2149&ref=wsf

The only difference for version 5 is for step 3, you would click 'Setup' then click 'Network' and switch to interactive filtering mode.

 

Thank you for the reply,

I probably have not been explicit enough.

Allow svchost.exe access to all remote servers means that all the services running from it will be able to connect to any server but, I wish only the Windows Update service to connect on dedicated servers.

At worst, a rule like: Allow svchost.exe outbound TCP to *.update.microsoft.com:80,443 (an IP rule isn't possible due to the turn-over, only domain name .. as far as i know) But there may be a better solution

Good day to you !

 

For Microsoft, I just created a Zone named Microsoft Corp, with Address range: 207.46.0.0 - 207.46.255.255 and use that Zone
for any firewall application rules I create that need to connect to Microsoft.

 

Hello,

I missed this functionnality !
That will solve a part of the planned rules.

For the example of Windows Update, I don't like a lot this solution because IP can change from a day to another but it seems to be the better compromise.

Thanks to you for the replies, if no other ideas are posted in one or two days, I will put à [Solved] tag to the title of the thread.

Bye