Outpost Firewall Pro 7.0 (3371.514.1232) - Final

If i had any doubt about OP,now i'm pretty sure that i have another reason to dump it.This time for good.The asc.exe process,it uses almost 60% of my CPU,and several times it uses 448MB of RAM (yes,448 MB!).Even if my laptop can handle the RAM problem with 4GB,is unacceptable.To buggy,to heavy...
I've searched on their forum,but found nothing.Just a work on,to disable automatic updates ...done it,and not helped me at all.

 

Joe .
Sadly this is how it goes so often with Outpost . There are good builds and there are bad ones . I love the firewall . But , I still have to use 6.5 as anything above screws up my email . Go figure . Outpost always contains bugs . It is a matter of which build works on your system . I suggest to try a different build as they come . It is very good if there are few enough bugs for your system .

 

OOOOkkkk....i will follow your advice and reinstall the 6 version.Just i don't want a "forced" upgrade.Hope not.

AFTER ALMOST AN HOUR...
UPDATE POST
Damn..this version slow down big time my web browsing.I'm using OP with NOD32 and MBAM pro without Website blocking.This is not happening with the latest version.Oh well...back to OA pro or Comodo.Plain and simple,OP doesn't like my machine.

 

The latest "patch" brings OP FW Pro 7.0(3373.514.1234)

It was supposed to fix a conflict between self protection and the update feature. It doesn't fix the issue.

To work around it, turn off self protection turn updates to manual via settings run the update once per boot. Then turn self protection back on.

 

I am sorry Joe . And I hope you did not think I was pushing you to use OP . I just know how buggy it can be . Right now , I actually use something other than OP because they have yet to get it just right to work on my system . If I can ever be of any help , let me know . I just never want you to feel like I am pushing or pulling you in any direction .

 

No problem falkor.It was my decision,not yours.And to be honest,i wanted to try one more time and give OP another chance.But no,definitely NO.
Thank you very much and i appreciate your offer to help me if i need.

 

You are most welcome my friend !

 

I always loved Outpost in the past, but i had trouble with version 6.7.x, but this new version is very good on my system.

I belive it has some bugs but they are on the right path to make a very good firewall.

 

I'm glad for you.Although,careful with asc process. i've seen on their forum plenty complaints,and as i said,not a solution yet.

 

The 6.7 version was awful for me . Version 6 was ok . 6.5 did well . Version 7 ? We will see .

 

For detail see:

http://www.outpostfirewall.com/forum/showthread.php?p=188719#post188719

 

Hi Escalader .
It is sad that " certain " people in that forum have to get rude . " He " takes it personally . I am sorry you had to deal with that . Again , we are dealing with people that think what they use is the end all product and how dare you say something that shows there is a problem . Just so you know . " whining " is a strong word and , in my opinion , uncalled for by a Mod . Be that as it may , you have legitimate concerns . I hope it gets rectified for you .

 

Well . I actually love the firewall . One of the strongest around . But , I can only use certain builds . I get irritated when a build screws things up for me . So why do I like it ? Because I know how good it is and i want to use it so I use something else until a good build for me comes along . I think most in this thread know how good it can be and want it to work with their system .

 

Yes it is sad but I've been my usual relentless self in pointing out the bugs. They are feeling the heat a bit I fear and not just from me.

FWIW, I'm using the product as we post. My goal is to make the product better and fix the errors.

The current issue of looping failed updates was reported prior to the patch to the final release and users are of course frustrated. The only proper way to calm the waters is to fix the bug.

 

Agreed !!!!

 

OP's mod chooses to excuse the number of bugs in OP by comparing it to the number of bugs in a new release of Windows. Good grief, if that is their "standard of excellence" it's no wonder OP is so buggy.

Why don't they compare themselves with new versions of high quality apps such as Defense Wall & Online Armor? I guess the answer is this . . .

If you can't raise the bridge, then grumble because no one has lowered the water.

 

You know guys that you are referring to me. Let me tell you I like to live in the real world. There's no doubt that software has bugs and we try to help out. It does no good for a poster to whine that they are in effect a beta tester because they encountered a problem.

My point is that beta testing does not test all possible configurations. When any software goes public it's bound to encounter situations that where not looked at during the testing. I didn't excuse anything by comparing to Windows. I simply pointed out how the real world works. That's what bug fixes releases are all about. In fact, I've had problems with the latest release myself. I don't excuse it. I want it fixed. What I don't want is an attitude going along with it.

We try to help as much as we can and in a professional manner. Posters should behave similarly and if you want to discuss my behavior you should do it directly at me there where it happened rather than gossiping at the backyard fence.

Here's what I said and where I said it: http://www.outpostfirewall.com/forum/showpost.php?p=188735&postcount=36

 

Hello Manny
Is the asc.exe problem known by the OP staff?The CPU and RAM is going crazy with that process.It will be a solution?Is this a singular problem or what?
Thanks.

 

Wilders is much more than a backyard fence. It is a forum where real & potential users of security programs can compare notes and experiences -- to learn, & to make purchase decisions.

Further, alerting potential customers to aloof or unfriendly support issues with respect to a given security product is not backyard gossip. It is useful information for making purchase/usage decisions.

Reporting such issues on the support forum of the given security product might be more palatable to that product's own proponents & fans, but (IMO) it would be less fruitful for alerting prospective customers.

Moreover -- "whining" is an inappropriate way to refer to a customer complaint in a support forum, no matter what.

It has been my experience that OP's forum Mods do an oft-thankless job with great competence. But the fact is that Agnitum seems to have "rushed to market" and that situation is something that potential users need to know & freely discuss.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If I didn't already own a lifetime OP license, I would buy one today. I say that because Agnitum made a quantum-leap forward in terms of OP-7's protective power relative to competing FW/classic-HIPS combos.

It is neither surprising nor particularly alarming that OP has a few rough edges. Power often means complexity.

Users who point out rough spots (whether by "whines" or otherwise) are doing a needed service. I am sure that Agnitum will smooth out the rough spots as quickly as can be effectively accomplished.

 

You mistake me for an Agnitum employee. I'm not. Rather, I'm user just like you. People should feel free to report any issues they feel are important. Just stick to the issues and leave the rest alone.

I've had my say. Y'all carry on in your best tradition.

 

Hi bellgamin:

Yes thanks for your support. I'm the guy who made the triggering post.

Sometimes things get hot at forums, believe me I know.

Diverse approaches to security policy and software quality expectations are certainly annoying particularly if not shared.

Nobody who knows this business expects perfection. But some errors are avoidable especially reported ones.

 

Can someone help me out...should I allow or deny this. No option for preset rule configuration. I want my system as close to leak proof as possible.

BTW, Manny, I appreciate all that you do.

Thanks,

Toby

 

Just hit "Block Once" and see what happens. But I'm betting you need to allow it permanently

 

Thanks wat,

Can I make a specific rule to allow explorer to modify memory only for IE or does it have to be for all other apps as well?

 

Thank you.

That might of happened because you opened IE from a link on your desktop. Something you did in Windows Explorer is modifying IE's memory space. That's a pretty standard thing and acceptable.

You can modify any application anti-leak settings uniquely via the the application rules settings but it's not other application specific. You allow IE, for example, to modify process memory injection or not. So once IE is allowed to do that, it can do it for all applications. The attachment shows the default for IE.

I'm a little surprised that you don't show a preset for explorer. Did you turn off ImproveNet? Are you having any other troubles?