is tiny firewall packed into ca security suite 2007?

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by areyousure, Sep 29, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. areyousure

    areyousure Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Posts:
    13
    i'm a long-time tiny firewall user and love this firewall product. but it's been nearly a year since the last version of tiny was released.

    can anyone confirm this:
    it's said that tiny firewalll is packed into ca security suite 2007 and should be released sometine by the end of this year.

    or:
    ca security suite still has ZA firewall built in.
     
  2. yahoo

    yahoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Posts:
    290
    Location:
    nowhere
    CA Personal Firewall 2007
    http://home2.ca.com/servlet/ControllerServlet?Action=DisplayPage&Locale=en_US&id=ProductDetailsPage&SiteID=caconsum&productID=50709000
    is available for $29.9. Here is the features from CA's webpage:

    New Features for 2007!
    Home Protection Pack - Protect up to 3 PCs.
    New and improved user interface offers simplicity and superior ease-of-use.
    Now based on Tiny Software® technology, widely regarded as best-of-breed firewall protection.
    Secure Now - provides proactive protection.
    Application Hardening - applications can block hacker attempts and run more safely.

    You can read much more about it from the link provided above. It seems a combination of ZoneAlarm (ID Theft Protection, Email Protection, Ad Blocking) and Tiny (Application Hardening), and looks quite interesting. I am somewhat tired of CA, so I probably will not try it anytime soon. However, I am very interested to hear from those who are brave enough to try it, especially some screen shots!:D
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2006
  3. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Main screen:-
     

    Attached Files:

  4. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Firewall rules:
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Applications running, with mem usage:
     

    Attached Files:

  6. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Installation went O.K.
    The updater kept attempting outbound connections, but I disabled this.
    But then cctray.exe made attempts to connect to "my-etrust.com(69.18.148.62)" there was no warning or alert from the firewall for this internet access attempt, and these attempts are continuous.

    I am now removing this firewall, if you want anymore info/screenshots, I can re-install later.
     
  7. unhappy_viewer

    unhappy_viewer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Posts:
    259
    CA Etrust Firewall 2007is now using Tiny Firewall's engine and no longer ZA's, after having time to integrate Tiny's technology into their eTrust lineup ater the acquisition. Whether ZA continues to use CA's AV engine in the future is yet to be known although it may will probably be the case for some time. Just an interesting note though, Check Point (ZA's parent company) is using Kaspersky's AV engine in their enterprise product. If the relationship goes well, who knows, ZA may start using KAV's engine (and maybe Kaspersky may use ZA's firewall engine).
     
  8. noway

    noway Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2005
    Posts:
    351
    I wonder how their quality control will be. They've spelled "access" 2 different ways in the screenshot above.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2006
  9. cprtech

    cprtech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2006
    Posts:
    335
    Location:
    Canada
    Thank you for the info Stem. Based on that last ss, it looks like it may have built-in HIPS. Can you confirm this Stem?
     
  10. yahoo

    yahoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Posts:
    290
    Location:
    nowhere
    Stem,

    Thank you so much for the screenshots.
     
  11. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    CA firewall is installing low level (SSDT) hooks, which would normally indicate this,.. but when I was taking the screenshots, I was not informed by CA firewall that keylogging (inject .dll) was taking place.
    I will have more of a play later, to see what is intercepted.

    Edit/update:
    I am getting some strange results, as the firewall is only intercepted some of the applications attempting internet access, it is acting as if it as a whitelist of applications, but cannot find any settings for this. The firewall "Overview" informs me I have 12 Applications "Secured", but only 5 are listed in Application control...... hmmmm I have just lost the tray Icon for CA,... possibly doesnt like my setup (W2K),... I will re-install later on XP to see if I get better results (At this point:--- the firewall does appear to be more interested in giving me popups for "Register your copy....." than checking on what is accessing the internet)
    I did check on a couple of leaktests,.. but the firewall failed these (ZA bypass,..PCFlankleaktest,... no interception of parent->child)
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2006
  12. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Your welcome,.. I have re-loaded CA firewall,.... so if you would like to see more?, no problem.
     
  13. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    I restored an XP image I use to test applications (This image is clean, nothing as been installed before), but on installation of CA firewall, there was a problem/ delay with installation as svchost(Network service) took 100% of CPU (Ath64-3800) for 5 min. Installation completed, re-boot O.K., but then on any access to firewall UI caused Svchost again to consume all CPU, then the firewall crashed,.. this repeated after all re-boots.
    So unfortunatly,(at this time) I am unable to check this firewall out on XP.
     
  14. cprtech

    cprtech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2006
    Posts:
    335
    Location:
    Canada
    Thank you again Stem! It's obviously too early to pass reasonable and fair judgement, but is it not looking like CA is butchering a great firewall (Tiny) ??

    To add more: I was not impressed with their "View a Demo" link on their webpage. After a few questions, they try to sell you one of their packages and also give you a link to get your pc scanned! There was no "Demo" link that I could see.

    To be fair, the price is excellent, especially considering it allows protection for up to 3 pc's. It is also ICSA certified (if that really means something, I'm not sure) and the list of security features suggests it is a very robust firewall.
     
    Last edited: Sep 30, 2006
  15. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    I will be installing onto another PC later (I may of caught driver conflicts in my last install), as I do want to see what this sandboxing is that is mentioned, and any possible extra protection being given to user app`s.
    The only thing is that the sandbox is only mentioned to protect CA`s own applications,..
     
  16. areyousure

    areyousure Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Posts:
    13
    i installed it ok on my computer yesterday. no problem with installation at all.
    and i gave it a test, only to find that, surprisingly enough, tiny 2005 pro passes pcflanktest out of box, and this new tiny firewall just fails it. o_O
     
  17. Zombini

    Zombini Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Posts:
    469
    This is never going to happen, Kaspersky has no incentive to get ZA firewall. They already have their own firewall with KIS 6.0. Basically ZA does not have any bargaining chips left. They are going to have to either acquire an AV company or they are screwed. Every AV/AS vendor out there that is any good now is building suites just like Norton and the firewall is a big part of the security suite.
     
  18. yahoo

    yahoo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2004
    Posts:
    290
    Location:
    nowhere
    Tiny Personal Firewall (TPF) is an outstanding product. Even without any update for almost one year, its capability still far exceeds many most updated products on the market. Its Windows Security module has scared off many average Joes, but on the other hand attracted many advanced users. CA should have improved the GUI of TPF to make it close to or superior to the GUI of ProcessGuard and System Safety Monitor, while keeping the Windows Security module. By doing that, CA would have kept the advanced users, and also made CA firewall appealing to average Joes. Unfortunately, CA seems to have taken the shortcut by stripping off the Windows Security module, and only keeping the network security part of TPF. As a direct result, it fails most (if not all) leaktests. Now CA has done an excellent job in scaring off both advanced users and average Joes. Cheer! :thumb:
     
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2006
  19. cprtech

    cprtech Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2006
    Posts:
    335
    Location:
    Canada
    I was afraid CA would kill TPFW, or at least butcher it, and that seems to be the case. You are right Yahoo, Tiny is an outstanding product. I would have had not hesitated in paying the $49.00 for it had it not been for the CA acquisition. Too bad. It seems CA tried to haphazardly combine their existing fw with Tiny's and then puked out this abomination. I guess it all comes down to the easiest way of making a fast buck from CA's point of view.
     
  20. unhappy_viewer

    unhappy_viewer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2005
    Posts:
    259
    You'd never know how far good business relationships and deals will take you. I did not say it was necessary for Kaspersky to use ZA's firewall engine. ZL may just acquire KAV's engine without needing a two-way deal. I think that would make it especially sweet for ZA AV customers (one of the best firewall plus one of the best AV).

    Of course nobody said that technologies cannot be abandoned and maybe Kaspersky might decide to abandon KAH and use ZA's engine if a 2-way deal is what the company wants. After all Kaspersky has the resources to develop their own enterprise firewall engine but choose not to do so, instead teaming up with Check Point's firewall engine. Other 2-way deals may also include advertising Check Point's firewall more etc. It does not always have to be a mirror deal.
     
  21. twl845

    twl845 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2005
    Posts:
    4,186
    Location:
    USA
    STEM - Thanks for the heads up. I'll have to check my daughters computer and see if they are offering an update. I wonder if I should update if they are offering. My experience with ZA was to leave a good version alone.
     
  22. lastwords

    lastwords Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2006
    Posts:
    1
    I updated my notebook's eTrust suite to ca Security Suite 2007 using the free upgrade available for a year. I am discovering that the default config for the Tiny fw is too restrictive for file sharing within a LAN (safe zone behind router). I am changing one thing at a time as I find a problem. So far I have changed the safe zone advanced settings to "allow" and "not block" incoming bios requests (two different checkboxes).

    The real problem I face so far is the cpu running at 100% with cctray.exe consuming about 70% of those cycles. I hope that ca will provide a quick resolution to this problem.

    Also, considering the need for less intuitive customization than the ZA fw, it would be nice if ca provides a readme or best practices guide for migration. The way it is now is that my network environment has been suddenly transformed/regressed and I have to figure out how to emulate my previous setup.
     
  23. tec505

    tec505 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2006
    Posts:
    284
    Location:
    Romulus, class M planet
    Hey man you have Hawk eyes!!!! :eek:
     
  24. areyousure

    areyousure Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2006
    Posts:
    13
    i found the firewall in this suite actually a trimmed version of tiny 2005 pro, no windows security, no registry protection. so i'm not happy with it at all.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.