Matousec

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by Doc Serenity, Aug 22, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 2 of 2
  1. henryg

    henryg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Posts:
    342
    Location:
    Boston
    henryg, Sep 19, 2007
    #26
  2. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,898
    Location:
    localhost
    Re: Matousec's exploitability...

    LoL... strange testing procedure... :D
    Anyway, latest ZA 7.408.000 is not vulnerable.

    Cheers,
    Fax
     
    fax, Sep 19, 2007
    #27
  3. Dwarden

    Dwarden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Posts:
    177
    Location:
    Czech Republic
    Re: Matousec's exploitability...

    guess You failed to read , he wrote that in article that 'some' of the vendors fixed it 'since' it was found ...
     
    Dwarden, Sep 19, 2007
    #28
  4. tlu

    tlu Guest

    Peter, I disagree. First of all, Matousec mentions products that are very good in his leak tests (e.g. Comodo) while implementing the SSDT hooking in a proper way at the same time. So it is possible to achieve both goals.

    But the more important aspect for me is that improper SSDT hooking is not only a security issue (which is not all-to relevant for me - here I agree with Stem), but also a stability issue that could eventually crash Windows. No software should be able to de-stabilize your OS - least of all poorly programmed security software. That's why I find Matousec's warnings absolutely justified although I agree that he tends to magnify some things at times.
     
    tlu, Sep 19, 2007
    #29
  5. wat0114

    wat0114 Guest

    I agree 100%
     
    wat0114, Sep 19, 2007
    #30
  6. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    I don't need him to tell which products are good. The BSOD"s tell the story just fine.:D :D I've found the stable ones I want.
     
    Peter2150, Sep 19, 2007
    #31
  7. jrspie

    jrspie Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Posts:
    37
    Hi everybody.
    I'm enjoying this thread and have a question or 2.
    I've learned from you that passing the leak tests is not the most important aspect of a good firewall.
    Stability is probably more important.
    But my question falls to this simple thing.
    Matousec, for the most part, seems to rate being leak proof very highly.
    So where do we find info about ratings of firewalls that are kill proof, more stable etc.?
    I can do my own leak tests. But I wouldn't know where to start to test for stability or anything else.
    So if I eliminate Matousec, where do we go for test results and non biased info?
    Thanks.
    J.
     
    jrspie, Sep 19, 2007
    #32
  8. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    20,590
    Unfortunately the only way to determine that is to install and trial them. I would recommend a good recovery program, like FDISR/ROllback or imaging program like Acronis/ShadowProtect/Paragon/IFW so you can insure complete removal.

    Pete
     
    Peter2150, Sep 19, 2007
    #33
  9. henryg

    henryg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2005
    Posts:
    342
    Location:
    Boston
    Re: Matousec's exploitability...

    That's funny.... The version number is still the same and has been for some time. So how or when was it "fixed"? To fix a piece of software without providing an update..... Now that's a neat trick! :D


    H
     
    henryg, Sep 19, 2007
    #34
  10. Dwarden

    Dwarden Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Posts:
    177
    Location:
    Czech Republic
    Re: Matousec's exploitability...

    guess You missed the part of
    and

    simply put while testing firewalls they found this problem, reported to vendors and they fixed it

    later they wrote test program and tested multiple products which results into article here discussed

    ofc it seems that these who were 'caught' and were 'fixing' the issue seems to be fine atm ...
     
    Dwarden, Sep 24, 2007
    #35
Page 2 of 2
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.
    Accept Learn More...