Hello, I am using Windows Firewall. But I dont want it anymore.. Please which is better? Kerio or ZoneAlarm? Thanks for your opinions and advices..
Why don't u try outpost pro? i have used zonealarm since 4.0 but i am tired of my computer being so slow etc... since i used outpost i was so happy with it. personally i find outpost better than zonealarm. outopost is lighter and more stable. but if u want kerio or zonealarm than i can only say zonealarm coz i have only tried zonealarm.
At this point, I'd say Kerio 4.2. I'm running the licensed version for the HIPS feature. ZA to me always seems to be a work in progress. KPF is running perfectly on my XP Pro machine. I will say that if you use the privacy features, it may slow your speed down a bit.
Both Kerio and ZoneAlarm are very good firewalls (free and paid-for versions). Kerio has a lower performance hit and ZoneAlarm is probably slightly simpler to configure; why not try Kerio and see how you get on? If you really don't like it, you can always uninstall it and then try ZoneAlarm and see if that suits your needs better. Either way, you'll be using an excellent firewall which is MUCH better than the Windows XP firewall. Don't forget to switch off the Windows firewall once you have either ZoneAlarm or Kerio in place and active.
Some people told me that KERIO is a little bit better than ZoneAlarm but kerio slow downs computer more that ZoneAlarm..
If ZoneAlarm slows down your system, turn off the antivirus monitoring feature. It's pretty much useless and eventually the "trial" period is going to run out. ZonaAlarm won't slow your computer down if you have 512 RAM.
As far as I understand, rule-based firewalls are always better than application-based firewalls, because you have more input. The trouble is, you have to know how to build these rules, which requires a better knowledge of internet and if you don't, you better use an application-based firewall, like ZoneAlarm Free. No wonder that most rule-based firewalls have a set of pre-installed rules to make it easier for ignorant users, otherwise these firewalls would have a small audience. It wouldn't be the first time that an ignorant user installs a rule-based firewall and starts asking many questions in a forum about how to build these rules. I have read this too many times. If you don't have the knowledge, start with an application-based firewall and IF you have the time and the skills, start learning how a rule-based firewall works.and then start using it.
In my own personal experience... ZoneAlarm is much more suitable for those with fast internet broadband connection coz it can really affect internet speed because of its pre-made rules built-in and Kerio is more better and very suitable for those using only a dial-up connection. Additionally, ZoneAlarm is much more very easy to use but is limited when you want to add some of your own application rules while Kerio is much more versatile and the packet filter is great for advanced users coz you can adds detailed filter rules of your own.
Zone Alarm gave me all manner of problems when i installed it - Kerio 2.1.5 on the other hand seems to be working fine.
I have used kerio 2.1.5 for years but I now have Kav 5.0.383 and zonealarm 6.0 running together and I really like the way they work next to each other. I notice no slowdown at all and Kav gets along with ZA 6 well.
I'll second this. This is the combo I have been using and it's been great. However, I've been running the new version(.195) of KIS 2006 beta(PRE-beta) and I'm loving it. Once this goes retail I can definitely see myself switching to it.
between the two id go with ZA as ive used it for a while in the past and have liked it. its easy to configure tho not for creating rules and ive heard its p2p unfriendly (mainly emule) so keep that in mind. ive also tried kerio but i dont really like the gui and it failed teh grc test. the hips features are appealing tho.
If you are new to firewalls and do not want to make a ton or rules then I would say go for Zone Alarm. If you like to learn and configure software then go with Kerio. They are both decent firewalls. Myself, I am still running and happy with Kerio 2.1.5. I know it's a bit dated but it still does the job for me. I must say however that I do have a Linksys router taking on the frontal assault.
Personally I'd go for Kerio over the free version of ZoneAlarm, but if your willing to pay then ZoneAlarm Pro would be better. Kerio is good and simple to use, but it uses quite a lot of resource and if your using P2P then you won't be able to go into the GUI. Although the firewall is actually in 2 parts, one is the service and other is the GUI. When your running P2P apps, the sheer number of open connections causes the GUI problems in reading from the service. The gui can crash, but the service doesn't. Zonealarm is good, but the free one is too basic for me. Zone Alarm pro v6 is good and you can add expert rules if you wish. I recommend you turn off the anti-virus monitoring as this will slow down your PC. I'm not sure why they installed that feature as a decent anti-virus will alert you if it's not upto date and also the Security Center (which is also worth turning off) in Windows XP SP2 also monitors your anti-virus.
I have run the new kerio 4.? and the zone alarm free 6.? Different soft 'walls different products obviously but judging on free criteria basis the kerio was able to be very "thoroughly" set up IF one wished. It seemed to me to be "capable"(even if user isn't -+) of more in depth rule settings. You could have it all but alert at every mouse click. 'Prolly that to. This can be daunting and of course an unneeded task. zone alarm free maybe has more resources used by a touch but here I found that 'bout close to equal really. It likely is easier to "set up" Once you get into the kerio interface you feel you want to play about with those custom rules and apps specific permissions. As for which is better I no longer currently use either one. Why? I just wanna enjoy life! Behind a decent system(router,restrictive group policy stuff) for now and many issues seem unresolved with za(though luckily I had little issues even uninstalling it left pretty clean.So did kerio. Kerio I only felt secure if I had it asking me for all but the most obvious issues(e-mail,spywareblaster updates,ewido updates-etcetera)alas it had more options than za free,except for my individual packet rules which I diligently set up(uh the time to do it,.. sigh ) Try each out maybe if you got a couple hard drives and/or separate loads see what you think-+ Theres as many opinions as there individual settings on these things!
Tyreman, I'm guessing by your last post that your not actually running a software firewall? don't you feeling that a little dangerous? if your PC was to be comprised, the virus/trojan etc would have free access to the internet with little to stop it.
Well I have uninstalled a lot of ms stuff only 1 item in general connection tab, you know whats in there usually. wins tab items either disabled or unticked items there. group policy restrictions Plus running some sys. internals items. But I hear you.
