Outpost 2.5 useing 99% of cpu.

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by tempnexus, Jan 9, 2005.

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

    tempnexus Registered Member

    Apr 16, 2003
    First of all I realized that Outpost 2.5 is a huge memory hog. 37mb! only plugins working are IDS, DNS and Adblocker.

    Ok I used to be a sygate pro owner and now I've decided to take the outpost free lifetime upgrade deal but I realized that the wall uses a lot of resources.
    Currently I am trying out emule and the wall freezes emule at 99%, this has never happened before with sygate. What gives?

    Also what exactaly is Stateful Packet Inspection? Doesn't every wall peform SPI? Didn't sygate do SPI? Also will Outpost 2.5 kill the network if it accidently gets killed? For example a trojan infects the sytstem and takes down the wall in order to get out, will outpost take down the network along with it or will it allow the trojan a free acess once it kills outpost? I know that sygate pro has the "once I am dead so is the network" routine. I think that is a very good idea.
  2. Paranoid2000

    Paranoid2000 Registered Member

    May 2, 2004
    North West, United Kingdom
    Outpost can be CPU-heavy if you have a lot of network traffic but this is more likely to be due to your anti-virus/anti-trojan scanner checking Outpost's logfiles which get written to very frequently - try excluding them as detailed in the Resolving High CPU Utilisation Issues with Outpost FAQ (this also includes further recommendations for lowering CPU usage). Amending eMule's settings to reduce download queue size may also help.

    Outpost's Stateful Inspection is covered in the Stateful Inspection FAQ.

    Finally Outpost has some ability to protect itself from malicious termination but it is pretty limited and not a match for many other firewalls - nor will it disable the network connection if taken down. This can be addressed though using process protection software like DiamondCS' Process Guard (in my view, it is probably better to have one such program providing protection to all your security software than having each one using its own individual protection since this does increase the chances of conflict and system instability).
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.