Zone Labs 6.0.631.002 products released

Running nice and smooth here as well and I use Avast.

 

Solved my New network problem by setting ZAP up to automatically put any new detected network into the Internet Zone by default, without asking me. So for now, it works fine. No idea why the network detection is different in 6 than it was in 5.5 or earlier. Always worked fine before. But for now all is well...

 

send a bug report to zonelabs

 

Yep, will do tomorrow...

 

same problem here, how u setup this kerodo?

 

It is a bug will be fixed in the next release early next week read here

http://forums.zonelabs.com/zonelabs/board/message?board.id=cfg&message.id=30621#M30621

 

Stephanos G if you go to Firewall/main/blocked zone. Then click click on the advanced tab then click on the Include networks in trusted zone upon detection.

Should work until the fix comes out

 

Thx Fitzy. I wonder how they couldnt find out this bug from before.

 

I`m still having a problem with the Anti-Spyware updates. It won`t connect to server. That will probably be addessed in the next Ver: put out next week. Sent them a bug report also. Other then that it`s working real fine.

 

Do you have to use their anti spyware? I really want to try ZA 6 but I don't want to use their Anti Spyware.

 

It comes with ZA Pro but you can turn it off.

 

Stephanos... if it's the internet you're connecting to and that's the "network" it's finding, then you will want to check the option that says "Exclude networks from the Trusted Zone upon detection".

 

Are there less popups for the process guard than those reported in the beta stage? Also when I tried it at the beta stage, my CMI audio config tab didn't work because it was being blocked by ZA 6 and well you couldn't add it to the process guard because it wasn't an .exe file - Does anyone know if they fixed that?

dja2k

 

As I have a "hardware firewall" (Linux iptables running in a Linksys WRT54G), I'm more interested in an application firewall. How does the new ZA stack up in this regard?

Currently I run Kerio 2.1.5 for this functionality - nice and lightweight. But I'm still looking for something that will allow me to specify EVERYTHING an application is allowed to do on the network, not just a binary "yes" or "no". I know there's one application out there that does this, but it requires that you send off files to their site for analysis and approval (can't remember the name right now). But I'm not interested in the "phone home" type of app firewall; I'll make the decisions myself, thank you.

I think there's a market for this type of application, especially as more people get routers/gateways with built-in stateful packet filters.

So again, how does the new ZoneAlarm 6 do as an app firewall?

 

Just to clarify, I was referring to older ZoneAlarm's yes/no 'net access specification, not Kerio's. Kerio is much more fine-grained, but it's still network-oriented, not application oriented.

 

What do you think about this:

About Zonealarm PRO 6

"I have read the ZA Forum, and all the marketing publicity, and I have seen nothing that would make me return to using ZA.

Outpost, if well set up, is resistant to everything. I can't imagine how a new technology could help a firewall be more secure than an already secure firewall. I do believe, however, that it may help ZA in that ANYTHING will be more secure than ZA version 5 .

My opinion remains that Outpost is more secure because it gives more possibilities. Also ZA 6 still fails to give the user control over Generic Host Process 32 for Windows, an application that remains unexplained, and which has been shown to bypass many firewalls, particularly Zone Alarm, in pursuit of its own agenda. Outpost is the only currently available firewall that allows control over GHP.

In the end, the choice is yours. You asked for opinions, and I have given you mine. It is unlikely you will find anybody in this forum who will say ZA is better, but my former position with ZA gave me access to information that convinced me that OP is a better firewall."

This was said at the outpost forum by a zonealarm forum guru that now uses Outpost...what you guys think? Which one has a high level of protection, Zonealarm 6 or Outpost 2.7?

 

That reminds me of the Titanic, that was also resistant to everything, except sinking.
Do you really think that Outpost is untouchable ? The iceberg just didn't hit Output yet.
Anything that was/is ever made by people, failed once, but people always need a good lesson to bring their arrogance back to humility.

 

I did an evaluation of the ZA_security_suite (6.0.631.002) and compare it with the Outpost_Pro (2.7.485.412), and these are my impressions:
1) Both are excellent FW and pass most if not all leaktests. ZA uses only a global components list for all approved application; OP uses both a global and a per application components lists. It seems that the OP approach is more robust, reliable and accurate than that of ZA to detect new leaks.
2) ZA_suite including Antivirus is nice, but using OP with free Antivirus programs such as Avast can accomplish the same.
3) ZA allows user to create user defined Groups for IP_addresses, Protocols, and Time. OP doesn't have that feature yet as far as I know.
4) OP's log system needs to be improved to have a combined Blocked_or_Allowed log view so user can see chronological view of logs.

 

So what do you think is more secure? I think that outpost is lighter and more stable, but the new tecnology called OSFirewall of Zonealarm PRO 6 is what is making me drifter...

 

A firewall is only as good as the application which it allows to access the internet. ZoneAlarm_Pro uses only a global components list for all approved application; Outpost_Pro uses both a global and a per application components lists. If you trust an application with bugs in its components and the same components are used to authenticate all other application, as in the case of ZA, I would rather chose Outpost_pro's approach to guard my PC.

 

With my I have gone through, Outpost only caused errors via blue screen crashes out of the blue, thats why I went with Zonealarm Pro instead. Outpost is a very good firewall, but it depends on your setup because you may get diffrent outcomes from it. Outpost is a more rule based firewall, which is good. Though Zonealarm has a nice and easy GUI to change settings right away, but is harder to setup rules.

dja2k

 

One of the lessons I learned while evaluating many firewall programs is that most new firewalls these days need to learn user's environment. When the user just installed the firewall with internet connected, thay all seems to choke a bit, some gets BOD because of it. Therefore I normally do the following steps to install a new firewall :
1) Disconnect internet to the PC which I will install firewall by unplugging the ethernet cable ( or the USB cable to the wireless 802.11 adapter, depends on your connection type)
2) Install the firewall, reboot the PC, let the firewall learn without internet connection for a few minutes.
3) then connect the PC to the internet.

 

Thanks for the advice. I will definitely remember this when I upgrade.

Rich

 

If you have the program control of ZA turned to high instead of the default medium (not available in the free version of ZA), ZA would warn you about components acessing the net.

 

Does anyone know where to find out what the different levels of TRUST LEVEL mean or block? I tried playing some stuff with Media Player when the trust level was at RESTRICTED and it didn't work, it worked at TRUSTED or SUPER.

dja2k