Privatefirewall 5 released

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by QBgreen, Aug 17, 2006.

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

    QBgreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Posts:
    627
    Location:
    Queens County, NY
    Happened to see this at MajorGeeks. This is a very light firewall that did fairly well with leaktests while it was in beta. I'd try it, but I'm currently content with my setup. So...someone try it and post back! :D
     
  2. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Hi QBgreen,
    I did try this firewall sometime back (cant remember which version). Have installed to have a play.

    It is running O.K., currently taking 20,500k, No slowdowns.
    I would of liked to see the ability to place IP`s within rules (for such rules as connection to DNS servers etc)

    Attached pic: Application rules,...
     

    Attached Files:

    • PF01.gif
      PF01.gif
      File size:
      113 KB
      Views:
      3,440
  3. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Process Monitor rules:....
     

    Attached Files:

    • PF02.gif
      PF02.gif
      File size:
      79.3 KB
      Views:
      3,439
  4. aigle

    aigle Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2005
    Posts:
    11,047
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia/ Pakistan
    Seems to have a real HIPS like function as well- looks nice.
     
  5. Albinoni

    Albinoni Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Posts:
    709
    Location:
    Perth, Western Australia
    And do we have the link to it ?
     
  6. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
  7. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    how good is it?
     
  8. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    I didn`t have time to check,... I will have a play later this afternoon.
     
  9. QBgreen

    QBgreen Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Posts:
    627
    Location:
    Queens County, NY
    Thanks for taking the plunge, Stem! Nice to have so many alternatives. Keeps folks on their toes.
     
  10. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

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

    Attached Files:

  11. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
  12. Huwge

    Huwge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Posts:
    405
    Location:
    UK
    Watching with great interest. In the market for a new FW soon
     
  13. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Well,.. its holding up well to the "leaktests", I have run 10 (2 failed to execute?), actually only failed on one at this time, which was "yalta" with comms over localhost(127.0.0.1), there seems no way to block this (that I have found yet).

    Will find more time later to finish the leaktests.
     
  14. mvdu

    mvdu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2003
    Posts:
    1,151
    Location:
    PA
    This firewall seems to have all the features I want, and it's running smoothly! Anyone know if you renew the license after a year or pay a one time fee?
     
  15. mvdu

    mvdu Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2003
    Posts:
    1,151
    Location:
    PA
    After trying it for a while, I found the prompting process a bit awkward. And it didn't alert on anything with the Yalta leak test. I'll stay with Outpost for now.
     
  16. Legendkiller

    Legendkiller Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2006
    Posts:
    1,052
    well outpost asks too many questions since 3.5 and in my experience outpost 4 isn't relaxing either...
    i would say comodo for now.
     
  17. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    The prompts/warnings could be made better (and made more understandable for new users)
    It would still alert on the execution of the program,... but,... you would of had to take the firewall out of training mode first (you would need to do this before running any leaktests), or all executions would be allowed.

    See pic,.. you would need to "untick" training mode
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Aug 19, 2006
  18. Huwge

    Huwge Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2004
    Posts:
    405
    Location:
    UK
    Did it pass the leaktests without being tweaked or did it need some work to get it to pass ?
     
  19. Velnias

    Velnias Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2004
    Posts:
    32
    According pic, detection is signature based ( how to understand "Leaktest developed by PCFlank.com 1.0" )?
     
  20. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    This was picked up by "process monitor->Send Windows messages" The name is taken from the "properties" of the file in question
     

    Attached Files:

    • name.jpg
      name.jpg
      File size:
      12.3 KB
      Views:
      3,041
  21. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Just the need to disable "learning mode", after this all executions of files (create process etc) are intercepted and asked for. The "process monitor" for the executed application defaults to "ask".
     
  22. djg05

    djg05 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,504
    I thought I would give Private Firewall a spin as it looked promising.

    I was a bit dissapointed as it came up with a lot of pop ups which I answered but never noticed my email (Pocomail) nor did it list it in applications. Also when I set IE to be blocked in applications and monitor I could still browse with it with no prompts.

    I tried the PC Flank test and DNS tester both of which it stopped, but I do wonder if these are hard wired into the system or they are legitimately blocking the exploit.

    Anyone else experiencing this?

    I am running Win 2k sp4 and had PG disabled.
     
  23. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Hi David,
    I did not see this,.. but from:-
    I will setup to see.


    This may cause conflict,.. as did SSM (even when disabled), I had to uninstall SSM due to conflict with system hooks (and firewall monitor then worked well). Is this free/full PG?
     
  24. djg05

    djg05 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,504

    Full PG.

    Even if PG is interfering I am not happy to run the system without it, so the comments remain unless it is specific to me or I am at fault
     
  25. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Hi David,
    I fully understand,.. I am in no way attempting to make you uninstall PG,.. I was just informing of the possible conflict.
    Your comments (as all others) are welcome and needed for a forum to find how a firewall is on systems , the wider the checks/tests/installations a firewall is made, then the better understanding of the firewall is made, and in the end,.. better for all.

    I, myself, installed this firewall due to post made, so, from this, its a case of "lets check it out".
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.