Outpost vs OnlineArmor vs Cis Hips Disabled

HI

i want to ask u ppl , which of above or any other on the market are the mosr secure when u disable its hips?

i mean outpost give inside his firewall option more feeling that it block a big waves of attack like in the pic




http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/2535/image444.jpg

 

I think maybe outpost is better for people's use.But the most secure,maybe they are same.if the rules of the firewall are good,it is securely.

 

What about IPv6 support?I know comodo doesn't.

 

I remember outpost suppurts IPv6.

 

I 'd say Outpost.

- Comodo has this loopback thing that it doesn't monitor the loopback connections without the D+ if i remember what Sded said.

- OA... I 've only used the free version and although very nice, the part that most disturbs me, is that once you allow an application, then any ports are auto-opened. It also occured to me, that i wanted to install some software to try it. I put the OA free in "learning mode" and and when the installation finished, the program had accessed the internet without asking me (despite i have the option not to auto-allow trusted programs to access the internet. Or whatever it's called. I have all he "manual" controls available turned on).

So, i 'd vote Outpost, for the fact that it seems the one that gives better control.

 

both online armor and comodo started at 1st as hips applications then the firewall functionality added later
but on contrary , outpost started as a firewall then the more advanced hips functions are added since version 6.xx "despite versions 3.0 3.51 4.0 had a minimal hips functions under the name "component control"
that's why the previous versions of outpost were scoring too low at matousec "which i don't like" then since version 6.xx i'd say that currently agnitum and matousec live in a honeymoon after a very long period of enmity between both companies

back to the main subject
after the previous introduction , aside from hips functions , OUTPOST has the most powerfull firewall functionality among the 3 leader firewall products

 

These tests called out here look like firewall attacks (IDS), not the things that a HIPS worries about at the application level.
Comodo has a very good users manual online for CIS that explains much of how it works.
The rules for D+ include the ability to block or allow access to localhost for each application ("loopback networking"), but the attack detection is separate. There were some changes to the localhost firewall rules along the way but don't know how all that worked together without D+. OA has a checkbox to "Intercept Loopback Interface" under their options/firewall, but not by program.
Outpost appears here to have a more comprehensive Firewall Attack Detection System than the others, although Comodo also calls out a large attack set (separate from D+) to detect and block. Haven't seen test/evaluation of which is more effective, though. And commercial security websites, with all their tools, are still vulnerable to attacks and off the air sometimes.

 

I agree Outpost has the most rich network attacks list, but I think most of this stuff is irrelevant now, because Windows tcp/ip stack took care of them as well. Also I think the era of the network DOS attacks if not passed completely is very close to this state. Hardware front devices and intellectual routers moved the fight from the tcp/ip level to the application/user level. Also this can be taken in account that the modern malware is mostly "money oriented" rather than just "hackers fun tools". I mean malware tries to steal info or build a botnet instead of just "disconnecting boyfriends from the internet" or "hanging up their computers".

 

fixed that for you

 

yea I dunno why Matousec doesn't Rename the testing to HIPS Testing.

I see they have rated MD at 87% MD would get top scores if it was configured
properly instead of just on default settings.

And regarding Inbound attacks a lot of that is actually prevented by your Router depending on how good it is. All Inbound attacks have to get passed your Router first before it even gets to your software firewall.

 

They test using the default configuration since that's what the vast majority of ordinary users have these products set up as.

 

Since when did they test with default configuration?
From their website.

http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/#methodology-rules

CIS, KIS or Outpost (Free and Pro) would never ever score as they do with default configurations, as these configurations are pretty low when it comes to HIPS protection.
E.g. with CIS malicious keylogging is delegated to the AV component..., Outpost does not even detect keylogging or direct disc access with default settings etc. etc.

I don't care about Matousec's tests, but the products are certainly not tested with default configurations.

Cheers

 

i totaly agree with mike nash , matousec is anti leak/software control test site

i dont need any software to supevise my pc , i want to aim to best firewall , hips less to protect my pc, any way most hips got this scan pc for installed software (OA) or "clean pc" (cis) , so what the point if u allow all inside and start to fight with popups for new software downloaded.

anyway there is also RISING FIREWALL 2009 FREE which is ony PURE firewall.
look very impresing , anyone got any info about it?

here are some a screen shots , look strong like outpost

 

demoneye, thanks for the pointer.

I wanted to try it out as it sounds interesting but haven't been able to locate a free version, all I've found is a shareware version that is free for trial - can you help?

thanks


edit: a forum search for my question (which I should have done in advance) brought me here
Is Rising Firewall FREE?
and here
RFW 2009 (Rising Firewall) Free + RIS 2009 Free

 

both online armor firewall and agnitum's outpost firewall are topnotch firewalls in my opinion.

 

Actually, Comodo started as a firewall. It wasn't till version 3.0 did Comodo add full fledged HIPS protection (Defense +).

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comodo_Firewall_Pro