Is Windows XP firewall enough for advanced inbound protection?

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by CoolWebSearch, May 9, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. CoolWebSearch

    CoolWebSearch Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,247
    Isn't Cisco hardware firewall/router?
     
  2. CoolWebSearch

    CoolWebSearch Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2007
    Posts:
    1,247
    Ok, I'll try to reformulate the question, I just hope it will be successful.
    What configuration abilities Windows XP needs in your expert opinion?
    I'm simply asking what any decent firewall should have in your expert opinion?
    I'm quite sure (if I remember correctly) that any decent firewall should have full SPI and IP protocol filtering, so far I do know you said, is there any other supplemental in firewalls that many vendors should use?
    Thanks for that.

    Regarding http://smuggling, should I be scared of it?
    Since I've read there is no protection from it!?

    Thanks a lot.
     
  3. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,201
    I don't completely agree.

    Assuming you connect to the internet, you run the risk of becoming part of a botnet, or getting unwanted and illegal content on your computer (for example, P2P, torrents).

    I don't know what Windows Defender is these days, I don't have it on my Windows XP system because it used to be a waste of resources with no real benefits.

    I'm not saying you need security software to be safe, but for most people it's required.
     
  4. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    Scaring is just a method of selling. If you can create an atmosphere where people believe that "if you don't have this and that, you will most likely end up getting .." or "without this, there is a possibility that you will .."

    I've always thought that the real problem is malware starting/installing, copying itself, injecting itself into other processes, deleting/modifying files, logging keystrokes, etc. So wouldn't it be better to try prevent this with a hips/behavior blocker/restricting/etc. than to allow installation of malware and then try to block it's way out.

    Outbound filtering is waste and a nice way to create false sense of security, or use it as a way to scare people(sell). The source of the "problem" isn't malware connecting out but infiltrating the operating system.

    Solution: focus on products that protect the operating system itself and not try to fill "holes" with winebottle corks.
     
  5. swami

    swami Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    Posts:
    215
    At least for me it is. The thing to do is keep your system clean in the first place.
     
  6. CircleGirl

    CircleGirl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2008
    Posts:
    61
    Location:
    Circle Campus
    The best XP firewall is Sandboxie. The firewall that comes from microsoft is inadequate for browsing--period.

    Learn to use SB in all of its functions and you will be 99.99 protected and still be able to see video and save files ect.

    Most firewalls are inadequate for serious browsing. Put in some time into SBing and you will stop worrying about firewalls period!!!
     
  7. elapsed

    elapsed Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,076
    Hello, you can't compare firewalls and virtual environments. Technically you can get malware simply sitting online without a firewall, sandboxie can't stop that. They are two different fields, and combined are a very effective protective solution.
     
  8. risl

    risl Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Posts:
    581
    Some pros and cons + my conclusion:

    1. It's easy to use.
    2. It's trouble free.
    3. It doesn't slow down anything.
    4. It passes all port scans/probes/etc.
    5. It doesn't cause software conflicts or crashes.
    6. It doesn't cost anything.
    7. It's probably does inbound filtering/similar to other SPI software firewalls.

    1. It easy to disable/no self protection
    2. It doesn't have any "additional" features like outbound filtering, hips, etc.

    I would say it is the best solution for a newbie or someone who's not interested in configuring stuff all the time or answering questions. The Windows firewall+Antivirus is _the_ "set&forget" solution for people who want something simple that doesn't annoy in any way or require any skills to operate. It will probably be good enough if you don't try to get into trouble or mess around.

    However, if you are "risk user" for what ever the reason you might want to complete it with some other additional software or install other firewall that does have some extra features.

    I use the XPFW and the AV only: no infections if I don't do anything on purpose. This setup doesn't slow down anything, annoy me in any way, cause errors/crashes/compatibility issues/etc. or make me tune/configure "something" all the time. Sometimes I even have time to do something more important than think about security related issues!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.