The Free Ones: ZoneAlarm vs. Online Armor

After trying Agnitum Outpost Firewall Pro 2008, I was dissapointed!
I experienced problems with both IE6 and Firefox 2.0.0.9, as I couldn't
download things properly, view certain pages etc.

I also tried Look'n'Stop, but I needn't find something really special about it.
While waiting for the final version of Comodo, I ended up with two (2) choices:
ZoneAlarm and Online Armor (both free versions).

I am looking for the best desktop personal FireWall (i.e a stand-alone one), as
I use seperate sofware for antivirus (NOD32) and antispyware (CounterSpy).
I have a 2.5 MHz Celeron D, 2GB of RAM, and WinXP Pro SP2.
I use a dial-up USB ADSL modem with 1.0 Mbps. I am a Home user; (no established Network)

1) Which one do you recommend? ZoneAlarm OR Online Armor ?
2) Is there another option, apart from these two (2) ones I have to consider?

Thank you in advance!!!

 

Online-Armor 100% Try it.
Badcompany.

 

Comodo final is only a week away . At least i hope because everyone knows comodo is known for late releases.

Is this an a v b thread?

 

Pretty much but our policy that concerns "a v b thread" is only confined to our other anti-virus software forum at this moment in time.

Bubba

 

Id go for Online Armor since its light and easy-to-use.

 

Hi,

No doubt : Online Armor

MaB

 

Another here for Online Armor.
Just take a look at the support at the OA forums and a couple of the threads started here.

 

Online Armor -- easy to use, set-it-and-forget-it firewall

 

I was replying to this:

 

Of course there are,but to keep it simple and not complicate the issue-OA is probably as good as any.

 

Some take the view that the main differentiating performance among software firewalls is outbound leak prevention. Under that view Online Armor would be a clear choice as it tios the field in leak protection and ZA free is near the bottom.

In recent releases ZA has become bloated and buggy as well, a shame as it was once the one to have.

My gripes about OA free are a long duration splash screen and blank pages in the interface. They really are trying to get you to buy the full version.

 

Regrettably in my experience,that is exactly the reason I'm not using OA!

Most are obviously having good experiences and thats why it can be recommended-but its certainly not light!

 

212eta.

If you are not using p2p (probably not because you dial) and do not want spend to much time on learning and configuring firewall and yet have decent protection which you expect from firewall - just go for Online Armor and forget that subject.

That what I find out reading this forum for few weeks and testing myself OA.

 

After your valuable feedback ,
my options are narrowed down to
Online Armor (free)
and Webroot Desktop v5.5.10.20.

1) Does anyone prefer Webroot Desktop v5.5.10.20 over Online Armor ?
2) Why?

Thank you ALL !!!

 

For a start narrow down what you want in a firewall(apart from security)-just saying the best,as in your first post, isnt very meaningful-wouldnt you agree..

Then read the threads to do with both.

They are quite different styles,try them both and you decide

As has been said many times-for final security there would probably be nothing in it.

In keeping with OA philosophy OA will be a bit more user friendly-they both have HIPS-DSA is noisier,but scores highly-whilst OA may have a bit better leaktest results for those who like that sort of thing,although that has not been established for the free version.They both seem fast as regards net latency and the memory hit is similar.

You seem to have a preference in any case for Comodo,judging by your first post-so why dont you wait a week or so till the latest is announced

 

Just for clarification and not an endorsement, OA-Free 2.1.0.19 was the one that received the 100% from Matousec. But to agree with Hairy Coo, it would be improper to base a decision on leak-tests. A firewall that leaks is only important when malware has infected your pc or when you want to limit the "call-home" ability of M$ or installed apps. Besides, Matousec is upgrading his leak-tests and the rankings may change based on this. I tried OA and WDF to make my decision based on my own experience. Other users' experiences only influenced my decision to try them all. There is way too many firewalls available and differences between them to limit the choice between just a few options. As to which I prefer...I don't normally use a software-firewall.

 

Hi,

Both may differ in some or perhaps in many ways. They surely are freewares and likely share this feature: phoning home. My bold and wild guess.
Now that ZA has a long history of being accused of phoning home , and has to this day provided no explanation on this front; lately on this forum, member has raised a serious question re OA free 's similar service. Mike usually is very quick in responding to any concern/question of his product, still stays unanswered to this question. I do not think people in this closely knitted Firewall community have sworn to secrecy of this sort, but, but what may be then Take care folks.

 

I have no info on OA as I have never used it, however ZA is a crap shoot with respect to pc problems, bad updates, and complicated uninstalls. After using it for quite a few years with no problems, I ran out of luck with one of their upgrades, and things went from bad to worse after that. I finally gave up and after a long and complicated uninstall I went to Comodo, where I remain.

 

If you are not to good in technical stuffs take OA as will be easier to use. However if you understand how to use HIPS and firewall and want to use p2p - between OA free and WDF I will choose WDF. Why:

1. Cover wider area than OA free.
2. Firewall is full Privatefirewall 6.0 which I think is decent firewall. Works flawlessly with p2p, have SPI etc. Look around for Privatefirewall but remember it is 6.0.
3. Have DSA which is decent HIPS.

So in short IMHO OA free is for somebody who does not want to much hassle and not use p2p.

WDF is "full" application and may need some more attention to setup. But nothing really hard.

In my opinion you will be fine with both. For me the only criteria here is ability to work best with p2p.

Try both and choose the one you like better and which works better with your system and setup. Pick either one and do not worry both are comparable.

 

Double checked-you're right,

 

Hi Perman,

I've been out for the weekend - where is this post I've missed?

We're VERY clear on what OA does and why in communication with our servers, and why...

Mike

 

Some (possibly stupid) questions:

Does OA free allow programs' permissions to be set to ask for each time they attempt to access the internet or can they only be set to allow or deny? I was looking at some screenshots of OA free and did not see the ask button in the firewall's program control. Maybe I missed it.

Also, I had read that if an OA free user was accessing the internet at a wi-fi hotspot for instance that all other computers using it to connect to the internet would be treated as being in the trusted zone. Is that true?

I have been toying with the idea of trying OA free but I use an older version of ZA free right now and I am having no problems at all with it. That plus the fact that I do know it can be difficult to uninstall ZA completely makes me hesitant to change. I am behind a hardware firewall also but I like outbound control. Would I be better off just sticking with ZA since I am trouble free with it?