Langa Letter: Readers Rate Desktop Firewalls

Another poll on desktop firewalls that may be of interest to some:

Langa Letter: Readers Rate Desktop Firewalls for full results and comments by readers.

"ZoneAlarm
(Recommended by 43% of respondents)

Sygate
(Recommended by 27% of respondents)

Kerio
(Recommended by 6% of respondents)

Outpost
(Recommended by 6% of respondents)

XP's Built-In Firewall
(Recommended by 5% of respondents)

Symantec/Norton
(Recommended by 5% of respondents)

NetVeda SafetyNet
(Recommended by 2% of respondents)

Tiny Personal Firewall
(Recommended by 1% of respondents)

EZ-Armor/eTrust Personal Firewall
(Recommended by 1% of respondents)"

Regards,

CrazyM

 

Verrrry interesting!

"In short: There's a lot of dust in the air, making the choice of a desktop firewall more complex than ever."

It's mind-boggling to realize how difficult it's become for a person new to firewalls to make a decision.

regards,

-rich
________________
~~Be ALERT!!! ~~

 

Good to see that good old ZA is still going strong after all these years.

 

I would think that most readers polled are just picking the firewall based on either it is the only one they have ever used, and/or it was the easiest to set up and use, not because they know which is actually more secure etc.

 

Just remember . Polls are hilarious anyway . They do polls on the news and every where else . ZA should be going strong . They will continue to . They are the most well known . They will always be near the top . When it comes to an AV , Norton will always be at the top when it comes to polls . Many people do not understand the inner workings anyway . ZA is very simple . Easy for anyone who uses a firewall . Again , it is a poll . If you want to see how sad it is when it comes to anything , do a poll . You will find out how people think . Not how good something is . Gives good insight into the thinking of people . Does it take intelligence to answer a poll ? Nope . Actually , it takes someone with very little insight . Intelligent people know that answering a poll is a waste of time . Polls done in here are the exception . I do not respond to polls in here as , again , they make no sense . But , this is a security forum and everyone wants to have a say
Last I looked , NOD was the most liked in a poll in here when it comes to an AV . That is because most AV users in here like it . Because more people use something does not mean it is an accurate representation of what is used . It means that the people that RESPONDED like it best . I also like how a company can say they are better than others . The ignorant do not realize that ZAP , for instance , can say they are the best when , in fact they are not . Their sales dictate how good they are . Symantec was around before Moses . They will always do well in sales . M$ is a good example . How many know of the problems in IE . Yet , how many use it . I do not like FF but , as for now , it is much safer than IE even though they only have like 9 % of the market . M$ will ALWAYS be at the top .

 

I imagine this could be considered another thread topic but given the top tier of software firewalls....a packet is a packet filter. How could any one software firewall be more secure than another in filtering packets

 

Hi Bubba !
How have you been my friend ?
I know you were extending your post to Slovak . I wanted to throw out my 2 cents . Packet filtering is packet filtering . But , the argument many make is cookie control , referrer blocking , disabling active x and javascript are not for a fireweall to do . A frirewall is to protect you from outside vulnerablities . The things I mentioned can be handled other ways . However , a firewall should have these controls . And the ones that do , are not using up anymore resources than if they were turned off . Simple is simple . Packet filtering is packet filtering . However , how many firewalls could pass all leaktests 2 years ago . And how many today ? If it is all the same , all firewalls should fare the same . They do not . Some ARE more secure than others .
And don't be shaking your finger at me again ! lol . Good to see your post Bubba . take care and I hope that helps

 

I was thinkng no matter how good the firewall, if one does not configure it properly, then what good does it do? No firewall is perfectly secure right out of the box.

 

ZA in itself is as secure and does the job well, one of the other reasons its on top is because for those who are looking for a least obtrusive firewall with lowest compatibility or other issues, ZA fits the bill, plus its free. Just because its on the top of the list doesn't make it any less secure that others, just that it has more appeal and that is not a crime. For new comers, I always recommend ZA free and nothing else, just tell them not to give server rights to anyone unless implicitly required, on their machines ZA does its job, day in, day out with no surprises and no less security that say my CHX packet filter or other firewalls.

 

ZA Free is perfectly secure out of the box, and one reason why it's so popular and people like it so much is that it takes all the configuring hassle away from the user and makes everything easy. It works well, does a great job, and runs right out of the box without any extra work. All one has to do is Allow/Deny any app that asks for permission out. Would could be easier? ZA will probably always be the best known and easiest firewall to use.

 

Doesn't the latest Kerio run right out of the box?

 

Yep, does for me...

 

Kerio runs out of the box, but Kerio 4x has been the bane of issues, too many in fact to chase out loyal Kerio users.

 

Kerio will never have the good reputation that ZA has, nor will many others no doubt.

 

Well I have never seen one run right out of the box and pass leak tests/firewall tests etc. Some are obviuosly more secure than others, but come on now? Pass all security tests right out of the box with no further configuration? I could be wrong, but I never had any luck passing all tests out of the box.

 

Most people don't worry about passing all the leak tests because it's simply not necessary to do so. Let's be practical.

 

ZA free passes stealth and provides basic component control unlike ZAP which passes all the current leak tests out of the box. Show me one free firewall apart from Jetico which passes leak tests.

 

So Kerio 4 should be avoided then?

 

Nope, use at your peril, wont' recommend it to newcomers but even for veteran KPF 2x users like myself, would check the bug logs at Kerio from time to time.

 

Kerio is an excellent firewall . 4.x . It is not that complex but , obviously more so than ZA . ZA is too simple . lol . You can test Kerio and see if you like it . If you like it , keep it . It is a very good firewall . If you do not like it , dump it and move on .

 

True, but either way no software firewall has ever protected me on the inbound side like my router has, and nothing is lighter on resources than my router either.

 

Obviously Zone Alarm (I think the free version) becomes the top among the lists coz it's the easiest to configure firewall and also the "smartest" that I have ever seen and tested compared to others in its class (that's why this is I think is the favorite of Steve Gibson of grc.com). I felt secure using ZA... it's the best and when we talk about the out of the box firewall there's no doubt it protects the pc immediately.. ZA was actually my very first firewall that I've ever used before I tried the others... and the only problem I've found using Zone Alarm was that it slowed down my internet speed and I can't trade in my security for speed coz I am only using a dial-up connection so I have to decide to look for other firewalls, even if I don't felt safe and secured using the other firewalls, I just trust that the "other things" will be handled by the other protective softwares.

 

Sweater,

Can you tell me how your browsing was slowing down, was it browsing on net throughput as measured with something like DU Meter etc. If it was just browsing, then it was totally DNS related