DefenseWall Personal Firewall

Defensewall is mostly a sandbox, but judging from the name it must filter packers too. How does it compare to a dedicated firewall software such as Look N Stop which I am also considering buying?

 

Hi,

You're wrong, it works with policy restrictions and a little virtualisation.
About the firewall it works well with LnS without conflict. You can use both.

 

It does filter traffic and the advantage is that the aplication control is build-in to the HIPS. Discussions on firewall's often are mixed up with HIPS. DW 3.0 beta scored a 100% in my personal Matousec based tests. I also had the priveledge of testing 6 different fw engines (on performance) of DW 3 beta. In the final version the most 'complete' version was chosen (with highest/most detailed filtering level). It was as fast as the old Windows XP firewall (which only looked at inbound traffic).

Pure filtering rules capabilities, the primary function of a firewall, is a total different story. When you can't interpretate blitzen zues ruleset for instance, there is no point in looking for a 'strong' filtering firewall.

My mother (she is born in 1933) is using my 100 year DW lisence on a Vista Business laptop. On her setup the Windows FW is taking care of the inbound traffic and DW is looking at outbound. Call me old fashioned but I really like the Windows build in Firewalls because they did an okay job on pure traffic filtering and had the advantage that they were active real early in the boot/log-on process.

Only when you want to fine tune the firewall on pure filtering ruleset, I would opt for the default Windows FW or LnS. Only when you know how to deal with them, you can tighten up the ruleset to your liking, e.g. when your router does acts as a DNS relay with fixed/blanked nameserver IP addresses yes or no, whether you implemented DHCP reservation (same IP address assignment to MAC with convieniance of dynamic setup), whether you use shared printing/file sharing, you do or do not have a NAS, etc etc.


Decision tree
1. When the above does not look like a hole bucket full of nonsense,
<> True? ==> you are problably better off with DefenseWall (for in and out) ==> end

2. When you know what is crap and what is real in the blue text?
<> False ==> you are problably better off with DefenseWall (for in and out) ==> end

3. Do you want to optimise your ruleset?
<> False ==> you are problably better off with DefenseWall (for in and out) ==> end

4. Do you think that all statefull inspection firewalls are equal?
<> True? ==> you are problably better off with DefenseWall (for in and out) ==> end

5. You are on Vista or higher (Windows 7 / Windows 8 )
<> True? ==> you are better of with WindowsFW (inbound) and DefenseWall for outbound ==> end

6. Consider buying a software firewall like LNS or try to get your hands on freeware like Kerio with Blitzen Zuess ruleset (or Sunbelt last freeware full version 4.7.5.0)


END

 

hi.
Is defencewall ready for a 64 bit computer yet?

 

No

 

Not to worry mate. You and hundreds of us are waiting for the 64-bit DefenseWall. When it IS released, you'll hear the cheers erupt.

 

Thank you everyone.

 

Defensewall is 100% bulletproof at blocking inbound malware. It is absolutely worthless at protecting if you aleady have malware resident on you PC. You still need conventional AV software when using this product.

Best to install Defensewall on a clean newly installed OS.

Check out tests of Defensewall at Malware Research Group web site.

 

From SoftSphere Technologies website (DefenseWall)................

So most defiantly Defensewall needs to be installed on a clean system.
100%, its hard to say anythings 100% bulletproof but Defensewall is the closest to 100% protection that I have found.
You don't need an active AV, at least I don't and haven't for some years now.
A light virtualization solution such as Shadow Defender or the like compliments DefenseWall nicely.
But some would prefer an AV to virtualization. To each their own.