Online Armor Firewall Shows Strong Promise

Understood Bubba but I was the one who started this thread.

 

That means nothing to me Dieselman in regards to who started the thread, since the thread does not belong to who started the thread. It now and into the future belongs to Wilders Security Forum. The thread topic remains Online Armor Firewall and as requested, take off topic chit chat to private. If you have any further comments concerning that request or other off topic comments you wish to share, Please do not hesitate sending me a PM. Any other off topic posts will be removed without even blinking an eye without further comment.

Bubba

 

Hello Nebulus,

It looks like you need to read more, or actually install the product.
The info you quote is to reflect the settings within the firewall, from a default install OA will act as an application firewall and will allow trusted application internet access, and then create any needed rules for those applications. This is what a lot of users want, so this is what OA did.

Even in the free OA, the default settings can be changed. You can certainly create rules per application for ports used.

I have just installed OA free on a VM so I can take screen shots:



Before anyone posts to say I should make restrictions on the rules, these have been (and I allowed) created within a closed VM (Virtual) LAN

I can understand that you personally may probably prefer more control than what is offered (but it is more than you thought). But many do prefer a more simple approach. As simple example, how many ZA pro users actually create expert rules per application, not many, they use it mainly as an Application firewall without a need to create rules.

 

Hi Stem,

based on the second ss, I'm not going to suggest you make tighter rules only wanted to ask if the "Ports" are based on direction, so that if the direction is Out, it is assumed the port(s) is remote, and if the direction is In, the port(s) is local? Also, is it possible to designate remote/local ip addresses in the rules?

Thanks!

 

The problem is that I want control options that used to exist in any firewall application - it seems that my definition of a firewall is slightly different than the definition of other people's. I will stop the discution about firewall definition, because it seems that I'm going offtopic

 

Yes,

Not in the free version. In the paid version, endpoint restrictions can be applied (from specific to list)

 

I on the other hand like the simplicity of Standard Mode in OA, among other things like the GUI. You seem to enjoy getting into it, so I think you might enjoy CFP with Defense+ activated, a little more.

 

BTW, why is almost every discussion here about a topic ending up in an A versus B thread?
Problems of adolescence? Too many fanboys? The secret desire for dictatorship?
Yackety-yak.

I especially like the OA (Free) Firewall, because it does the job for me.
Start an app, hit Allow and OA creates an automatic ruleset in terms of ports directions and protocols.

For many other PFs I have the choice to Allow All for an app or to do ten or twenty clicks, one for every single port, direction and protocol or so.
This is why I call the OA Firewall smart and usable for me.
If you have different needs, take something else.
That’s freedom of choice.

Cheers

 

Well if you use advanced mode you get bombed with pop ups.

 

In the beginning it usually is like this, as it was for me, but then you eventually learn what ports to assign, such as remote 80, 443, 53...etc. The same goes for local ports where you don't have to assign any or you assign a typical range like 1024-5000. The same learning procedure goes for protocols and direction.

If you just let the firewall make the decision making for you then it is very simple, yes, but you learn nothing or very little in the process.

 

Not true.
I use advanced mode and the only time I get pop ups is when I install something new or uninstall something old or change a protected program.
No big deal.
Personally, I think Online Armor, the whole package is terrific, firewall and all!

 

If you don't like it to get bombed, don't use OA advanced mode <snipped>

Cheers

 

I agree its great but I used advanced mode and launched Gamespy and each and eveerytime I launched it I was asked permission. Each time a different port and I stopped at 10 times. I think this is due to advanced mode. I will ask Mike.

 

Again, check the local port(s) in those rules. You may find you have ten identical rules except that the local port is different in each one; eg: 1027, 1028, 1029, 1040, 1046.... and on it goes. I am convinced this burns a lot of people who first use advanced firewalls. That is exactly what happened to me in my early use (2002-2003) of these firewalls. I could not for the life of me figure out why the alerts would continue non-stop for what I thought were identical rules, when in fact, as I eventually discovered upon cloiser inspection that it was the local ports were different in each permanent rule.

Set a range of 1024-5000 for local ports or disable alerts for them altogether.

 

Why dont I just use standard mode? Any better protection in advanced mode? Thats what is going on. Gamespy shows about 10 ports.

 

Not being too familiar with OA, sure you could use the mode that works best for you. If you don't want full, granular control over your rules, then that would be the way to go. Some people, like myself, want full control so we choose the "Advanced" mode, or whatever it's called for the particular product.

So this is where you need to determine which ports those are. Are they local or remote? I have no idea what Gamespy needs for those parameters, especially remote. The way I feel about all this is that it is always best to allow only what any particular application needs. Advanced mode will afford you this control, but it could make your life miserable trying to fine-tune all your rules when there are so many parameters to set up and you may not yet have the experience or expertise to do this.

All I can say is that for those who don't want to be bothered, they better choose the simpler mode where the product creates most of the rules for them by way of choosing allow or deny for the alerts.


Full control over all rules is not for everyone. It takes a desire and commitment of time and effort to learn this methodology if chosen.

 

Hey guys,
I just got one question to ask.
Does OA Free give 'relatively enough' protection? (Y/N)
I don't get it, it has too many gray text in the product comparison part
at tallemu.com.
And since it's FREE, doesn't it have some security vulnerability?

 

Look here.

http://www.online-armor.com/comparisons.html

 

Installed OA after having zone alarm for so long and i dont like the idea of almost all my programs being on allow as default . Would have preferred that i had a once off pop up (like zonealarm). Also no options for temporary access, its either allow or block. The way the program access menu is layed out doesnt help. I guess thats what alot of people have stuck with za for so long, it so easy to navigate and use.

 

I agree. Zone has been around for years and has been perfected. I still use it over OA. Hopefully the new version of OA will be different.I went back to Zone Alarm after so many pop ups with OA.

 

I agree, ZoneAlarm rocks and it's still better than Comodo (accoring to my experience). Nothing gets in, and this is what I really need. I have 100% clean PC and that's why inbound protection is extremely important to me. It's the best of the best, there's no doubt about it.

 

LOL better watch what we say or Bubba is gonna be in here editing our posts.

 

Deleted - part of satire -