Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by SnowFlakes, Oct 13, 2013.
can someone provide me show me a link to the latest firewall test ?
I am intrested to see it.
Unfortunately there are no proper firewall tests (i.e. testing packet filtering ability). There is one testing HIPS but not really the firewall component... sorry.
anyone else ?
PCMAG had an article recently about free firewalls:
Could i use the ZA FW together with the Comodo FW and Hips if i just use the Comodo Hips part.
Even if they are compatible each other I wouldn't pair them together. The risk just ain't worth it IMO. What's wrong with Comodo's firewall component?
The PCMAG link said the ZA FW was better than Comodo.
IMO it's too dangerous to switch your firewall (or any software) to something else just because of some reviews out there. They're good references, but by no means the supreme commander who can tell you about what you have to do.
I tried in the past but my system froze.
why not just use the ZA FW HIPS? unlike Comodo it's not full HIPS, so it doesn't ask about every process, but it's behavior based, so it will stop and ask about processes that behave suspiciously, which is enough for me -- although i still use it with Qihu 360 antivirus, which includes a Proactive Defense component (process, registry, network, file and driver protection), which I think is similar to HIPS of some kind and so far no conflicts ZA firewall.
You are indeed pretty well covered...
Yesterday i decided to uninstall Comodo FW and install ZA FW. So far so good.
You're better protected with ZA then with Comodo
useless as all leak tests...
Of course you are not!
... as they say "To each his own"
I would like to see some proof about ZA protecting PC better than Comodo....
Taking into account that CFW has HIPS and sandbox (plus behavior blocker is coming in the next version), somehow I doubt this claim.
May be the users do not care about HIPS CHIPS and TRIPS... just personal choices!!! Look and feel... for them ZA give more confidence. For others another product will give more confidence... etc... etc... You are entering in a very subjective land. Again to each his own
Wait....he said explicitly that it protects better in general...show me that and I will agree.
He can make a test and check it....
That way I can say Immunet protects better than BD or Kaspersky....and we all know that it does not.
Run few malware files and see which system will stay protected.
Comodo and ZoneAlarm firewalls are both considered top notch free firewalls so for me it's more about which product runs more smoothly on my system. I used Comodo 5.x for a long time, but started having problems with it, especially when I tried to update it to v6.x so that's why I went with ZoneAlarm. Which one is actually "better" in some objective measure may be an interesting academic discussion but misses the point for practical consideration.
Prove it ?
Run 10 malicious files on 2 systems with CFW and ZA FW.
What do you think:which one will fail to protect?
It is hard to believe that CFW with all that stuff was out done by ZA FW. I never thought i would be without CFW having used it for many years. After that PCMAG read i decided to give ZA FW a try.
Just about firewalls:
Windows firewall (windows firewall control if you want to simplify it use) offers the same protection than any other commercial/free firewall.
Separate names with a comma.