looking for firewall for my vista 64 bit comp

hey wilders, ive been using windows vista firewall cause i had no need for outbound protection(and both computers are behind a router), but after installing online armor free on my secondary xp home 32 bit comp, its really simple and effective because it also has hips intergrated with the firewall.

but there is no online armor for 64bit computers yet.

so i was thinking about outpost firewall free but i have a few questions.

does outpost free also have hips with the firewall like OA Free?

 

Yes, protects critical parts of the OS, NT kernel, win32 subsystem etc

 

ah ok thxfor replying, is the hips part of outpost firewall free just as good as the hips on online armor firewall free?

 

You have Threatfire - why not use that??

 

If you like Online Armor wait for the 64bit version - it seems in its finishing process.

You can use Windows 7 Firewall Control for the trial time (IMO 30 days) meanwhile
http://www.sphinx-soft.com/Vista/order.html
W7FC uses the Windows built-in WFP (windows filtering plattform).

Outpost is another great software but it has also a HIPS (can be turned off)
so Outpost offers more security than a pure firewall.

on 32bit i use torchsoft but on 64bit i would change to W7FC Pro or LooknStop.
both really small at easy to handle.

 

howd you know im using threatfire?

well threatfire is not like a full hips, its just a behavior lbocker

 

I'm just getting used to this app but setting it on high should make it work like an hips - no??

 

threatfire is a behavior blocker not a full blown HIPS. but if you set it to level 5, it can sorta act like a HIPS program because it alerts you on EVERY SINGLE LITTLE THING(yes even windows update lol)

but no one actually answered one of my questions, is the hips part of outpost firewal free just as good as the hips of OA Free?

 

Honestly, it all boils down to personal preference. Give them both a try and see what you like better. If you're using 64 bit I wouldn't wait for OA to be compatible. They have stated on the beta forum they do not know when the free version will support 64 bit or if it even will.

 

yes i know its personal preference but is the HIPS of outpost firewall free as good as the HIPS of OA firewall free??

 

Yes, it is pretty good but i sure hope you like "popups". I removed it cause it wouldn't, no matter what, "Shut Up"!

 

ok installed the 64 bit free version on my vista 64 bit comp, its working fine but i noticed it doesnt show up in windows security center? and i had to manually disable winodws firewall

EDIT: i triedrebooting and itsays i have no firewall

also in the lan settings of outpost firewall free, i have 2 networks called ::/0 and fe80::/32. what are these? and how do i make it so my computer cant trust any other copmuters on my home network with OP firewall free?

 

Thats IPv6 - look into settings of your LAN connection - if you
dont need it (for router or provider) just uncheck it.

PS /32 or /0 is the mask for the Subnetwork netmask
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netmask

 

ah ok thx for the info, so its nothing to worry about right?

and also i noticed in the lan settings it doesnt show my lan ip address 100% correctly. its all correct except for the last lan ip address digit. why is that?

also, how do i get outpost firewall free to register in the vista security center. it says i have no firewall

 

netmask != your IP address

 

doesnt answer my question....

1. In lan settings, it shows my lan ip address which is all correct except for the last 3 digits. it should be xxx.xxx.x.xxx, but its xxx.xxx.x.x(the last x being a 0), what is that? (shows up correctly in windows, and my router but not in outpost firewall free)

2. how do i get outpost firewall free to register into windows security center?. it says i have no firewall even though outpost firewall free is running fine and the services on running in task manager and the system tray.also, i had to manually disable windows firewall after installig outpost firewall free( thought it would disable it automatically like online armor but i guess not)

3. when you install a software firewall when you are already behind a router with firewall, the software firewall shouldnt change the router settings right?

 

That's your LAN, as I've already explained. I'd suggest reading the fine documentation. (example: 192.168.0.0/255.255.255.0 covers 192.168.0.1 - 192.168.0.254 address range)

 

In a LAN the first and last number aint available -> .0 and .255 - trey are reserved.
LAN starts with .1 (in common networks it is router) and ends with .254.
Depending on your configuration in the router you have a low IP near to 2
or a higher near to 100.
Lower is more static IP (static DHCP with pre-given/reserved IPs),
higher is more dynamic IP (dynamic DHCP - first come first serve).
(same for WLAN - static or dynamic)

which version?
which windows?

1) you should differ your LAN-IP and your WAN-IP (world area network = internet).
Your router has inbound the first LAN-IP (look upper) and outbound a WAN-IP given from your provider.

3) router firewall is for inbound, software firewall most times for outbound safety
so you should focus your inbound safety - when a system is infected a firewall
can (possible) protect the web from your infected computer.

- protect your browser - safe browser - not that crappy IE
- dont click on something you dont want
- download i a safe environment
- DONT start unknown executables
- run unknown or new executables in a sandbox oder virtual machine

 

yes my lan ip is different from my wan ip given to me from my isp.

im runing vista 64bit and outpost doesnt register into the security center even though its working. windows says i have no firewall.

also, when you install a software firewall, the software firewall shouldnt affect/change the settings in your hardware firewall(router) right?

EDIT: and when you get a pop up from the HIPS in outpost firewall(i have it set to maximum), and when you click auto learn mode on that pop up, its just for that one pop up and not all of outpost firewall right? and outpost uses a whitelist(defualot-deny) instead of a blacklist right?