Potential new users or customers of outpost firewall reading this thread are going to be left with mixed signals about its protection values. Im not sure when the transition took place,but what started as simple firewall software have now evolved into multi-tasking antimalware suites. I am of the belief that firewalls and security suites should be entirely different programs.
Calc.exe is just used to represent payload delivery. Obviously the vendor is not going to download anything malicious. You might want to test with SurfRight's exploit test tool. Many more tests with this tool. There are 32 and 64 bit versions. Just make you use the right version depending on if you are testing a 32 or 64 bit app. Tip - when testing your browser, make sure the browser is open before running each test. You can download it from here: http://www.surfright.nl/en/downloads/
Hi.. I have a license for both outpost firewall and the suite,and the rating (GOOD)for the file in question is the same in both.I'm not sure whether the file is rated as good because of improvenet,because its signed,unknown,or because it isn't actually doing anything inherently wrong in itself?,but the fact remains that the result of running it loads multiple websites ,some of which host malware or phish and download other stuff.Ive used outpost on and off for years before the hips was introduced.I do still like it and the suite is one of the lightest out there .and the nicest without the stupid metro guis.Nevertheless I cannot ignore how many times its let me down when Ive tested it.Ive attached a screenshot of what crossbrowse did in seconds while I was still getting "GOOD" ratings from outpost.At that point I just disconnected my internet shutdown outpost and ran mbam.
As far as I remember, last pure firewall was 2.7, the one where presets were still text, gone now Version 4 already had Antileak, v7 antileak expanded to cover more areas.
Are these tests benign or do I have to be prepared for restoring my image? I don't have an extra win7 computer to play on. @ellison64, thanks for sharing all this information. Most valuable. Shakes you up a bit, doesn't it? All the more reason to have paid MBAM running all the time, but that's OT in this thread. I was hit by stuff bundled into ImgBurn about 2 years ago (older version on XP didn't have trash in it). Outpost sat quiet. MBAM alerted. But it wasn't severe like your example. It didn't go roaming the internet.
I actually did the same with imgburn a few weeks ago (the pups are still in there).I needed something to burn windows 10 ISO.In fact imgburn installer is still bundled so you can test outpost by downloading imgburn from the official site and choosing "mirror7" provided by imgburn. Im currently trying comodo at the moment (i dont know fhow long for as I always swap and change).I used to slag it off but at least it does the job.
They are perfectly safe. I have used them multiple times. Don't know if they have been updated for WIN 10 though.
Outpost is not designed to find PUPs (potentially unwanted programs), it assumes if you have installed them and OK'd the hips in spite of any warnings, that you wanted them. caveat emptor - be careful what you install and what 'bundled' crud it may try to shove on you. (mbam works fine as an added layer on top of outpost products by the way - i have a lifetime license myself). leak exploits like memory injection into apps can be blocked in the advanced settings, default is to ask you. signed apps from a list of trusted vendors may not prompt you and may create their own rules to allow certain 'exploit' functions for known safe programs. this too can be turned off - blocked - (or allowed) as you get more comfortable fine tuning your paranoia level. the defaults are set to allow it to work for most people straight after installation - with a reasonably safe installation that you can harden as you gain more knowledge of how it works. the anti-malware functions were added & the FW turned into a suite to keep up with the other players in the field and demands from the public. 'why don't you have anti this-that-or the other like fromodoro? why does fromodoro pass all it's own specific anti-leak tests for exploits that have never happened in the field? why doesn't outpost have an antivirus component like snortin does. i'm swirtching to mcaffter because it has all those things and you don't, even tho they may be better supplied by third party software layers on top of a good firewall. anyway, as agnitum has to make a profit to pay it's employees, they must bow to market forces & supply what the customers want. personally i don't like one of the main competitors because of their ethics and past shady doings. i support agnitum because of theirs. they are so far honest and apolitical (i am not fond of their government, the majority of the people are better than that) and if i had any inkling they were not i would drop them like a hot potato.
Your opinion or is there actual proof of that statement. I suspect the former which doesnt really count for much.
Just like with the previous version, I get a UAC prompt on start-up. Have to go back to 9.1 again then ...
Oh yes!! its been a subject for many years and unfortunately.. for reasons of respect for 'Wilders' forum I will not get into it....and yes Outpost(all version) smoke the heak out of that and other firewalls!! @Redmoon...if you search the forum here you may find the answers
It might not be designed to find PUPS but it shouldn't OK them as a GOOD rating either.If a user installs software that he doesn't know is bundled ,and outpost popups only show GOOD ratings ,then how is the user responsible for that?.
hi the last version i have used was 2.7 , because i liked only the firewall after become a program that i don't like anymore is it compatible with nod32 ? seeing eset include an hips too? thanks
" is it compatible with nod32 ? " No ! 2 drivers, 2 proactive systems dont works without conflicts, try it with Windows Defender ( MSE ), nothing else.
Yes and no. By default the http/https scanning is incompatible between ESET and Agnitum products; as such Agnitum products will warn/complain upon install when an ESET product is detected. However by disabling certain components of ESET products (after install, followed by a reboot) they get along quite well. I have used Outpost and NOD together for years now without issue after disabling the conflicting module in NOD. ESET has a good AV (vs Agnitums IMHO) but Agnitums other protection modules, HIPS/firewall,etc are [once again IMO] superior. As such I mix and match both with a few tweaks that allow them to run harmoniously. I then get the best of both worlds. I still use OSS for on demand scans but NOD is my real time AV.
Outpost is an excellent firewall for geeks, the good geeks who knows the network rules, who is a good geek ? ... Without infection, there is no need to filter outbound, so the only good firewall now is Windows firewall. The end.
hi i'm interested about only outpost firewall , could i customize the installation may i know which component should i disable , right now i'm running eset smart security 9 , the firewall is decent....
hi are you talking about windows 7 -8 and 10 firewall ? it does pop up for outgoing data ? i many cases is unless
Any easy way to block WebRTC with OFP ? I have just started using AirVPN, and Opera/Chrome/Vivaldi have known WebRTC leak issues.
i block webrtc in my browser (firefox) config. don't use opera/chrome/vivaldi. (there is a webrtc blocker addon for chrome.)
I was considering a more global approach using OFP. The other option is to activate AirVPN's network lock at startup, but I do hope OFP will agree EDIT : Activating network lock also activates windows firewall, and I doubt it can work alongside OFP without any conflicts. I just have to find a way to tweak OFP so it block WebRTC.
