Firewall and HIPS

Endorse that
1. User friendliest = OA, but OA has option to run safer (as LUA)!
2. Most granular = EQS
3. Most portable = D+ (works on XP, Vista 32 + 64 bits)

I think either a Sandbox + Behavior Blocker or Sandbox + silenced HIPS (see my EQS or D+ setup) is sufficient.

A easy to use combo is OA free + DriveSentry free. When running internet facing in OA as safer the vulnarable part of HKLM registry entries are protected. DriveSentry protect most HKCU entries in standard settin plus it has great file protection (which OA has not).

 

What do u mean by D+ being portable?

 

Kees would you mind for the somewhat illiterate in regards to that particular term to help out with just a brief explaination when you mention the term "granular" in the same breath as EQS.

EQS = is more complex is easy to grasp for me, but granular escapes me at the moment.

SandoxIE + EQS + DefenseWall. What is an honest opinion of this trio?

 

I have noticed a number of people here saying how good EQsecure is. but from what I have found on other sites about it makes me confused.
http://membres.lycos.fr/nicmtests/Unhookers/unhookers_results.htm

 

I am also puzzled...
What about the combo OA free (latest version) and EQS?
Does it really adds to protection?
OR OA free (latest version) and EQS are... mutually exclusive?

BTW, I run them without a conflict under WinXP SP2.
However,the issue remains: Do I really need both of them ?

Let me share with you the following:

Whenever I tried to run inside my Sandboxie a self-extracted file,
which contains 4 infected files - virtumonte trojan,
it was Online Armor (free) and not EQS that reacted in the first place.

Any ideas and suggestions?

 

If you care that much about leaktest, the update might be important for you.

 

Thank you!

 

It doesn,t matter who reacted first. BTW either one will be sufficient.