I need a simple answer for a very simple question: Can Sygate Firewall Pro be replaced by Dynamic Security Agent (DSA) ? http://www.privacyware.com/dynamic_security_agent.html
I think that if you currently run sygate pro ,and then tried DSA you would probably return to sygate. ellison
I would have to agree. Sygate Pro is a fairly full-featured firewall, something I don't think DSA alone is meant to be or compete with...
I just read a comment on another forum that the new Webroot Desktop Firewall Free version is just a rebranded DSA. Is this true? EDIT: N/M I see this being discussed in the other thread.
DSA offers all of Sygate's intrinsic firewall capabilities. The main difference is that Sygate is MUCH more configurable than DSA. You MIGHT say that Sygate is for *advanced* users whereas DSA is for the *rest of us*.
I think that the responses to PaulBB's original post regarding Sygate and DSA have adequately answered the question of whether DSA is a viable replacement for Sygate Firewall Pro. The short answer is yes, but if you require, let's say, advanced firewall configuration features, DSA may not meet all of your requirements and SFP or Privatefirewall would indeed be options worth exploring. DSA was designed as a free desktop defense product for those requiring basic, but solid, firewall functionality but who also desired some proactive features to enhance protection from intrusions or malware where signature-based solutions might not deliver protection adequately. Another issue that has surfaced within this thread concerns Webroot Software's release this week of Webroot Desktop Firewall 5.5. WDF 5.5 is indeed based on Privatefirewall 6.0 (which will be released in a couple of weeks). It is not a private label version of DSA, however. WDF 5.5 includes all of the features of PF6 (most of which are also in PF5). All DSA functionality is integrated into Privatefirewall 5/6 and WDF 5.5. The key difference between the Privacyware version and Webroot's is very simple - the behavior-based features (DSA) are disabled by default in WDF 5.5 and enabled by default in PF5/6. Both WDF 5.5 and PF6 are Vista compatible. There are a number of other minor differences between the two applications, bit nothing particularly noteworthy. Another key point worth noting is that PF6 and WDF 5.5 are among the most widely compatible firewall applications on the market. By this I mean that they will cohabitate with a significant number of other personal firewalls and Internet Security Suites. As a general best practice, it is not advisable to run multiple personal firewalls on a computer (as one might validly do in the case of malware scanning software), but if you do (and really enjoy alerts and pop-ups), I suspect (based on extensive testing) that you'll have better luck doing so with WDF 5.5 of PF6 than with other firewall products. PF6 also continues to achieve very good leak test performance. I may be stating the obvious here, but as a general rule of thumb, if you are experimenting with different combinations of desktop firewall products, please make a habit of uninstalling old builds (including for version upgrades) - especially as it concerns any version of the Vista OS. The incompatibility of pre-Vista drivers on Vista machines can product interesting and often painful outcomes. Thanks for all of the interest and posts regarding DSA and other Privacyware desktop defense products. I'm sorry I can't be more active in this forum, but do try to check in once in a while as my schedule allows. The road to Vista support has been intensive to say the least, but the end result should be worth it. If you are a current Webroot customer, WDF 5.5 delivers comprehensive firewall capabilities and proactive anti-threat defense to their outstanding spyware and virus scanning offerings. Privacyware customers stay tuned for future product release announcements and other news. DSA will continue to be offered free of charge. Greg Salvato Privacyware
I thought Sygate Pro blocks outbound connections, in part, on a signature database that is no longer updated as the company was acquired by Symantec. Unlike most firewalls, this makes Sygate Pro more like an AV without updates. If you want Sygate functionality today, it is only available in Symantec Endpoint Protection 11. However, considering how limited the list of Vista compatible stand alone firewalls is, the addition of Webroot, and soon Private Fireawall, is very welcome, especially to those with a favorite stand alone AV.
Hi all, Because DSA fails at GRC stealth test- I'll stick to Sygate to be sure. Can DSA be used with Sygate?
In another thread,you said that you tested Webroot and it failed,so how meaningful is your testing? Stick to Sygate by all means,but dont rubbish another product,especially as your criticism of Webroot is plain wrong! If you check the Privacyware website you will see that DSA has many of the features of the complete firewall. Probably use Threatfire instead,which is a pure HIPS and runs light,without many popups EDIT-and dont forget to disable "server" in Sygate unless p2p
Temper, temper mon capitain, I was just speaking of my personal experiences, and not as a critic. Thanks for your links to the portscans on the other post, and your tips in this one. And as I said in the other post I am a noob with these things. Kind regards.
There was no temper involved at all May I suggest that you retry Webroot,or failing that quite a few other great freebies around-all complete packages including HIPS and up to date(OA,COMODO,) a big moo from the COO EDIT; your best bet probably would be Online Armor Free,which is simple,powerful and has HIPS. If you want to re-try Webroot,be sure to set Internet, Network security and Process Monitor to High and enable the three settings under File-Advanced settings.-Voila-all stealthed!! Sygate is great,but seems to have some weakness.
I have had Sygate Professional on my computer(s) for a long time. I have felt comfortable and secure using only the defaults. However, Diver brings up a valid point assuming he is correct in his thought. Those of us who continue with this firewall, without it being updated, are we only fooling ourselves. I would like to hear from some of the more knowledgeable Sygate Professional users on their thoughts regarding this. Thanks in advance.
I always understood that the sygate sigs were just part of its IDS function ,which was a security"extra" to the firewall function. ellison
I used to use Sygate exclusively but abandoned it as it aged. I totally agree that since it has had no development in years that there are much better firewalls on the market among them DSA & Webroots. I think its time to move on, Sygates time has passed.
"Aging" of a firewall has (almost) nothing to do with it's functionality. Aside from it's old IDS signature database which is not that important (at least for me), the functionality is the same as in the first time, it isn't reduced with the passing of time . The only problem with an old firewall is that if a serious flaw is discovered, there is nobody to fix that flaw, because the firewall is not supported anymore. But as far as I know there is no such serious flaws in Sygate Firewall...
Sygate is still fine, the only issue it has is the old proxy issue. If you're running proxy software of some kind then something can blow by Sygate and get out without an alert, but otherwise it has no problems..
