Thoughts on Kerio 4.**

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by djg05, Jun 26, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. djg05

    djg05 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,504
    I know that Kerio does not suit some people but I have seen a test here
    that gives a condeming report on it. How factual is this report or is it just being alarmist?

    Personally I like Kerio and feel comfortable with it but if it is a vulnerable as it appears maybe I should reconsider.
     
  2. Mem

    Mem Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2005
    Posts:
    292
    Until the critical 'bugs' can be confirmed by an independent source (or even the firewall vendor) as being sound you need to take a wait and see approach. They were planning on releasing limited information in a couple of weeks so you may know something soon.

    https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=133513
     
  3. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,786
    If you like Kerio 4 and it works well for you, then I'd go ahead and use it. I'm sure it's no worse than most of the others nowadays. In that report, they make pretty broad blanket claims, saying things like this:

    "Kerio Personal Firewall is too heavy for a personal firewall software because it reduces the computer performance for about 27% and uses over 17 MB RAM."

    Sure, it uses about 26mb ram, but I'd like to see them substantiate the claim that it reduces computer performance by 27%. That seems like nonsense to me. I never saw any such reduction in performance when I used it.

    So I'd be skeptical of most of that report until they make the specific findings public and prove their claims.

    I don't use Kerio 4 myself anymore for other reasons, but if you like it and it works for you, then I'd use it..

    Just my 2 cents.. ;)
     
  4. djg05

    djg05 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2005
    Posts:
    1,504
    Thanks Both

    More or less what I thought. I did have a dabble with Jetico but amongst other things I found it slower than Kerio although it uses less memory. Possibly I did not have it set up correctly.

    I do think if you adopt a layered approach rather relying entirely on a f/w you are reducing your risks and also avoid dubious places.
     
  5. brjoon1021

    brjoon1021 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Posts:
    143
    I like it quite a bit. I turned off the predefined rules and imported the BZ rules set from the Broadband reports forum. You can find that rules set here -
    http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,8023708~mode=flat

    Until someone can prove otherwise, I think that it is a good firewall-

    Zone Alarm crashed or locked up every computer I have ever tried it on no matter which ZA version I used.
    Filseclab is nice but it locked up the same computer exactly the way ZA did.
    Jetico is niice if you have the time and energy. Jetico also passes more leak tests than Kerio. If you have Antivirus, AntiTrojan and other software and you are not a porn site surfer than leaktest survivability is not important to my way of thinking.
    I am watching Comodo posts here.
    Ghost firewall is over my head.
    .... so... Kerio 4.x is imperfect among a selection of imperfect choices. Whether that website that claims a lot of bugs is accurate or not I can not say. I emailed the website's firewall reviewer and he reiterated the bugginess of Kerio and stated that ZA is probably 100% better. Funny because Kerio has cause me no problems on ANY PC; ZA has crashed every PC.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.