another Windows Firewall Control?

Good news. I have finally found "the bug" which was responsible about the duplicate notifications for the same program. Now, when a rule is created, WFC will no more nag you again with the same notification. Finally. I'm still doing some more tests and in a few days I'll publish the new version.

Thank you all, for your patience and support. Even it is a small 250KB program, it has thousands of lines of code which I have to check and debug. Pretty hard task, I never thought it will be so difficult.

 

I have not experienced this in the last two updates and honestly thought it had already been fixed or just eventually went away. Is this the same as the "can't create a rule because one already exist" issue?

I have a question about WF.msc. I want to save this with my view settings instead of having to re-set it every time it's opened. Can I replace trustedinstaller as the owner, give myself permissions and save it with the new look? If it would work, I do know how to restore trustedinstaller as the owner and place security permissions back to default. I'm just looking for a way to change the default view for reasons mentioned. I know that I can save the .msc under a new name but then it would not open from WFC context menu unless there could be an option to add the custom .msc to WFC context menu. Does any of that make sense?

 

First question, yes. Second one, no.

More good news. I finally found a workaround (kernel32.dll API) to fix the drives recognition path. From now, all paths are recognized properly, even when Windows is installed on disk15 on partition T:\. In a few days I will publish the new version with the new updates.

 

Great program alexandrud, I have always felt that Windows Firewall is more than adequate for protection and your easy to use program adds that extra option to easily make rules. I am a registered user, the only thing I see as an improvement would be to make it a registered service rather than use the Task Scheduler to have it run automatically, have you thought of that?

 

I presume this would also overcome the limitation of not auto-starting in a standard account?

 

Yup!

 

Let's assume that I will split the program into two parts: a Windows service, and the other one is the GUI part. This is not a difficult task. Also we will install the service with the local system account, to have full privileges. The service will have full administrative privileges and auto launches the GUI part. Awesome.

But this will not to be dangerous and inappropriate ? Let's say you are a network administrator, you install WFC on your network computers, and then you create a few permitted rules. The other users on the computers are standard accounts. If the service launches the GUI with administrative privileges, all standard users will be able to make changes in WFC. So, in one way, I will help home users which use standard accounts, for security reasons, to have WFC launched at start-up, and by the other hand, computers administrated by a network administrator will be affected.

Am I wrong ? Maybe you have thought differently.

I have used Task Scheduler instead of HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Run because in this way, WFC can start with administrative privileges even on admin accounts when UAC is enabled. Also, even when using an admin account, but UAC is enabled, those accounts don't have read permission to HKLM.

Until now, the simplest way for a standard account is to launch WFC from the desktop shortcut with Run as... . By default, nothing is executed with administrative privileges on standard accounts.

 

I don't think this would be dangerous, I think your largest user base is the home user, not an Admin on a business network. Also, in my opinion it's not bad to allow standard user accounts to make rules, the biggest advantage of the program is to see and decide what is coming and going from your pc. You can also password protect the rules if all of these things are a problem so only admins or users you want to have the password can make changes.

 

Agree. If you're really concerned about the network administrators issue then the way to handle it is to password protect the GUI. The Sphinx Windows Firewall Control takes the approach of service/GUI with admin privileges and so starts up successfully in a standard user account. I'd have thought that your primary user base is home users anyway.

 

I installed the free version and set it to Medium Filtering, wich for me was the only reason to use this app.
Well, it blocks outbound by default (good) but you have no pop-up window to allow the program (bad). You'll have to go to the FW to create a rule wich is a nuisance.
I know that the Pro version (yes, Pro, not registered users) has extra options but why pay when you have so many FWs for free.

One last thing: to donate and to buy are not the same thing. Donate is optional. Please stop being cynical and assume what you are doing: selling a product.

 

I would want to use WFC on two or three computers.
I suppose, with the registration bound to a specific machine, this would not be possible without donating three times,
which would indeed stretch the meaning of donation. Or am I wrong?

That said, I'm generally against machine specific/online activation licenses.
Too bad. This probably means I cannot use WFC although it is exactly what I was looking for

Maybe this will change somewhere in the future?

Best regards
D.

 

From your point of view, you are somehow right, but let me say also my point of view. I develop this little application in my free time, after my classes and after my job. Because of that, I don't have time to manage a full time business. If I had sold a product, this would have meant that I am doing a commercial activity, which has many legal implications, and also gives, a lot more expectations from customers who pay for a product. In the meanwhile, I have to pay my host plan for hosting the website, for domain name, for the Visual Studio license, etc. That's is why I request a little donation of 10$ (which means 2 sodas when you go out with your friends), to pay all these fees and keep developing the program. And, for the people who really care, I want them to be able to access all extra features, as a reward for their support for this project. Anyway, if a user really believes that a software really worths his money, he will pay for it, even it is called a sale, a donation, or anything else. I'm sorry if I offended some of you with a sale disguised as a donation. This is not a scam on the internet, nobody is forced to donate.

Source: http://donationcoder.com/Articles/One/index.html

 

Source: http://www.binisoft.org/donate.php

So, if you need to register three copies of Windows Firewall Control, no one will stop you to login into your account and get three registration keys, anytime you need them, without to donate again. I think this is pretty decent for 10$.

 

I have published the new version 2.9.6.

What's new in version 2.9.6

√ Fixed "the bug" which was responsible with the duplicate notifications for the same program.
√ New method for Learning Mode which can get now the correct path for all applications installed on all hard-disk drives.
√ The list with "Current Network Connections" will display now also the program name which made the connection.
√ Added support for Learning Mode for Windows that is in italian. Currently working languages are: english, dutch, french, finnish, german, italian, spanish and swedish.

Thank you for your support.

 

Thank you for the update, alexandrud. Looking forward to trying this out later

BTW, I can't believe people are nit-picking about a measly $10 donation for a nice product that involves a lot of one's time to develop.

Also, I do agree with others that this utility should launch as registered service to allow standard users access to it. The majority of 3rd party fw's run this way, so I, for one, see no harm in it. This will likely be used mostly by home users as others have mentioned. Thanks again!

 

One question, what offers this firewall against others like outpost, comodo or online armor, talking only about the firewall part. Faster, and lighter?

WFC also offers Inbound and Outbound protection? I though that windows firewall only offers protection in one way.

 

Windows firewall with advanced security is already built-in to the O/S (Vista and Win7) and it will offer both inbound and outbound protection.

The benefits include:

• already built in to the O/S
• no potential introduction of 3rd party bugs
• extremely stable
• excellent packet filtering

alexandrud's utility is an interface to it that allows one to easily create rules on the fly via pop-ups - a limitation of the built-in firewall.

 

I'm researching to find a way to split WFC into a service and a separately GUI. In one of future versions, I will add this functionality due to your requests. Have a nice weekend.

 

I agree! Worth more than $10 if you ask me.

 

Hi Alexandru,

Thanks for your explanations! I have just registered

It is very nice of you to allow more than one installation!
I still don't understand why you chose to make it machine ID dependent then.
In this case I'll bear with it because I like WFC very much. Thanks.

Best regards
D.

 

Indeed

 

Excellent alexandrud! I will be glad to test anything for you if needed.

 

Hi all,
Presently I am using Windows Firewall + Trend Micro Firewall Booster. TM Firewall Booster uses the same platform as WFC but does not provide pop-ups for outbound connection as WFC does. Will I be able to install WFC in this setup without any conflicts?

 

Windows Firewall Control is compatible with Firewall Booster from Trend Micro, in fact it has nothing to do with it. Windows Firewall Control is an independent front end for Windows Firewall which provides a few, but important, enhancements to the built-in firewall that comes with Windows 7 and Windows Vista.

 

Thanks alexandrud. Please tell me what type of Filtering (high/medium/low/no) should I choose for seeing those pop-ups for new out-bound connection?