Re:Outpost v2 vs. Leak Tests

Hello people,

Outpost v2 is out! Someone would like to test it with all the Leak Tests we mentioned before?

Best regards,

Patrice


- Changed title to show this thread is for Outpost 2 leak testing - LWM

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hi Patrice. Since you are an avid LNS supporter, I wonder why you are so concerned about Outpost and leak tests?

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

I’m an Dedicated Look ‘n’ Stop Supporter but just because that’s so doesn’t necessary mean I’m not interested in keeping up-to-date with other Software Firewalls and it’s Features & Capabilities for kn0wledge wise.

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hi root,

LOL Yes, I'm really convinced of Look'n'Stop, that's true! But this doesn't mean that I don't check out other firewalls as well! Let's say it like that, in my opinion LnS is the best software firewall at the moment which exists. But this doesn't mean that in future it will be the same. If there will be another one which is better, I would certainly change. But if I look at the ideas Frédéric has at the moment, I'm really doubtful that some other firewall will be able to beat him (especially concerning inside-outside protection).

I was using different firewalls all over my life. I started with ZoneAlarmPro, went to NIS 2003 and then directly to Look'n'Stop. There are indeed some other good firewalls as well (Sygate, ZoneAlarm), I don't neglect them at all! But in this special case, we had a discussion about inside-outside protection about Outpost. Now I would really like to see if they have done their homework. You got my point now, root?

Best regards,

Patrice

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Why the hack are there two threads Outpost vs. Leak Test I didn't start a new thread when I was asking this question

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

I'm glad it's split up, because the subject and the discussion didn't match after item 15 or so.
(perhaps split because it became too long, after some 100 posts?)

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hello,

Right

Rgds,

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hello,

Several weeks ago, I had an opportunity to test with several LeakTests. Here is the list. I used the latest versions available.

GRC LeakTest: PASS

Yalta: PASS

Yalta Enhanced: PASS

Oubound: PASS

TooLeaky: PASS

FireHole: PASS

AWFT: PASS

Oops: PASS, but DNS rules must be assigned to apps, not global

Thermite: FAIL, there may be a way to pass, but I have not investigated this one too much.

GOD2: I am not sure. I have little knowledge of this particular application but it is my understanding that information has been forwarded to Agnitum for review. However, since Outpost V2 is released, someone here might give it a try. I need to learn more about GOD2 before I would consider installing it. I am not anxious to create problems for my PC.

Best Regards,
DavidH

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hi DavidH,

thanks for this information, that's very interesting indeed! So, it seems to me that they did their homework! O.K., then we can say that the inside-outside security of Outpost is safe as well!

Best regards,

Patrice

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hi Patrice, sorry if that seemed aggressive to you. I was just curious as to what you were getting at, and you answered.
Like David said, Thermite and Oops came out after Outpost dealt with the leak test, so the fix did not get into version 2.
I will not try to hide the fact that Outpost still has a few issues to deal with and there are plans for more features to be implemented. It was decided to release Outpost 2 at this point because it fixes some big issues that needed fixed and if we keep working on fixing all bugs before release, it would be a long time coming.
The way it stands right now, I have no doubt in the ability of Outpost to protect its uses more than adequately. I will still recommend everyone using SSM as it offers protection to what are basically Windows issues and I see it as a tool in ones security chest just like and AV, AT or Firewall.
If I ever thought that Outpost did not protect its users and Agnitum was not working as hard as they could to fix the problem, I would drop it in a heartbeat.
Theres a trial copy of the Pro version, so anyone interested in taking a look at the changes can do so easilly.

Regards

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hello Patrice

The above test by David was done while in beta testing. We ran all the tests in the regular released version (2.0) and come up with this:

Passed = Leaktest v1.2
Passed = Yalta
Passed = TooLeaky
Passed = Firehole v1.01
Not Tested = Thermite - for WIN XP only
Not Tested = Outbound - No longer available
Not Tested = AWFT- Not for use by Win 98SE
Not Tested = Oops v2 - Not found

So there we are. And a good day to you, too, madame.

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hi QSection,

Maybe this will help. Some of the URLs to the Leak Tests have been hidden. But these should get you there.

LeakTest
TooLeaky
Outbound
Yalta
FireHole
Oops2
Thermite
Atelier Web Firewall Tester

I have also tested things like renaming a leaktest to a custom application and trying it in different directories. Outpost V2 did well in all cases as it identifies every application entry by MD5 Signature, Path, and Filename.

QSection, you say it passed Thermite. I find that difficult to believe. If you are aware of some Outpost configuration secret or maybe have some insight into where I may have gone wrong with Thermite, please let me know.

Patrice, thanks very much for the feedback.

Have a good day.

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hello DavidH

Again the test known as Outbound is not available on the site you mentioned, AWFT is not meant for Win 98SE and Oops v2 is not available on the site you mentioned.

Thank you for the attempt, though.

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hi QSection,

I understood the first time that AWFT did not work on 98. But, that message was also for the general forum readers.

I can zip and post all of the missing Leak tests here later this evening.

 

Re:Outpost vs. Leak Tests

Hi root,

No, not at all. This question was o.k.! Actually you would have found my answer already in the first post (I was starting the original thread) why I did this. But let's say the thread took another path. Certainly also a good one, because it helped to fix an "error" in SSM.

Actually this was a very interesting thread overall!

Best regards,

Patrice

P.S. Thanks Q-Section and DavidH for all the tests!!

 

I just wish that I knew how Q got Thermite to pass.

 

Hello DavidH

It appears Thermite only works with XP as per the Read me file. It did not even seem to notice IE was running on our test computer.

Best wishes.

 

Hello Q,

Thanks for responding. Now things are making sense. I totally forgot that Thermite worked only on XP. Although, it would be interesting to gain an understanding of the operation of Thermite. Since I am not a software developer, I am unable to gain insight into the function of Thermite from the source code. The reason understanding the operation of Thermite would be interesting is that maybe something could be done to the OS on a registry or service level to avoid the circumstances that allow it to work. Thanks again Q.

Best Regards,
David

 

You are welcome.

 

Hi there

For whose who are looking for leaktest links, take a look at http://www.firewallleaktester.fr.st
website that i just finished.

and can everyone agrees about outpost 2 results pls ?

regards,

Guillaume/gkweb.

 

thanks

and sorry for the cross post

regards,

Guillaume/gkweb.