what is your favorite windows firewall controller?

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by zfactor, Dec 10, 2012.

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

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    i have a few clients asking for something like this and i know there are many of them. so what is your favorite and why? for sure want it to be reliable and without a ton of bloat and slowdown, i have played with just a few as i normally dont use them and i am seeing a lot of them and dont have time right now to test every single one i am finding so throw me a few suggestions.

    thanks
     
  2. iammike

    iammike Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2012
    Posts:
    276
    Location:
    SE Asia
    For me it's Windows Firewall Control (link: -http://www.binisoft.org/-)

    as it is low on resources, very user friendly and the most important point is that the Author is listening and is very fast with implementing features and/or fixing bugs.

    There is also a topic here on Wilders:
    -http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=293143-
     
  3. Night_Raven

    Night_Raven Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Posts:
    388
    None. All of them doo way too little at cost of way too much resources since they are all .NET.
     
  4. erim

    erim Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Posts:
    43
  5. pandlouk

    pandlouk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Posts:
    2,566
    I prefer windows firewall notifier.

    I run it when I want to quickly create outbound rules for the apps that I want to have net access and then I disable it. After that I modify/fine-tune those in the "Windows Firewall with Advanced Security" and then import them in the Group policy firewall.

    Panagiotis
     
  6. safeguy

    safeguy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Posts:
    1,718
    I don't use one at the moment, preferring to work from WF.msc instead.

    Reasons:

    1. I have created my own basic set of rules.
    2. I can easily export the policy and import it back if the need arises. This is useful for me when I make changes I wish to add as permanent and especially when I do a fresh install or an image restore.
    3. 1 less program to keep track of (upgrade/update).
    4. I don't get pop-ups for outbound (similar to the principle of TinyWall). For my use, that's a blessing most of the time.

    Now, with WF.msc, there may be times you may want/need to:

    1. Temporarily allow something outbound
    - you can create a rule manually or if lazy, just set WF to allow all outbound.

    2. Allow something outbound but finding the right program isn't as straightforward.
    - you can do a web search or use Event Viewer to filter it out.

    This is where/when Wokhan's Windows Firewall Notifier can come in useful at times. The fact that it works alongside WF.msc (it uses the rules created) makes it an OK 'add-on' in my view.

    http://wokhan.online.fr/progs.php?sec=WFN
     
  7. moontan

    moontan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2010
    Posts:
    3,931
    Location:
    Québec
    i've tried this one in the past and gonna start testing it soon again.

    no way i'm gonna install .NET on this machine if i can avoid it
     
  8. mrtonyg

    mrtonyg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    35
    Location:
    USA
    +1 for Windows Firewall Notifier (WFN)

    Low resource usage, in fact it is only loaded into memory when needed...and no .Net requirements.
     
  9. Seven64

    Seven64 Guest

    TinyWall.
     
  10. alexandrud

    alexandrud Developer

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2011
    Posts:
    1,230
    Location:
    Romania
    It uses NET 2.0 and even if it is not loaded in the memory all the time, Task Scheduler (schtasks.exe) is. So, a program is loaded in memory all the time to make this work.
     
  11. mrtonyg

    mrtonyg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    35
    Location:
    USA
    I was misinformed about the .net requirement...sorry about that!

    Task Scheduler is running in my system anyways, so no loss there.

    Forgot to mention:
    One thing that is huge in my book is that with WFN there is no installation routine.
    Just unpack the zip file to a directory of your choosing and go at it!
     
  12. Krysis

    Krysis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Posts:
    366
    Location:
    DownUnder
    Windows Firewall Control! - simple to install - easy to use and understand (I have no issues with .NET as I had to install this for other programs in Windows 8 Pro) I tried Windows7 Firewall Control (free) just to check it out – but it's somewhat limited - most options 'greyed out' - only option for 'system' rules is 'EnableAll' which allows all application access (essentially equivalent to switching off the firewall completely!) I believe the paid version is far better – but, I had no intention of paying ($37?) for something which has such a poor 'free' version. I can manage WFAS but I think the $10 for WFC is money well spent. I haven't tried WFN as I'm quite happy with WFC.
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2013
  13. LowWaterMark

    LowWaterMark Administrator

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2002
    Posts:
    17,876
    Location:
    New England
    The French language posts have been removed. This is an English language forum section.
     
  14. Syobon

    Syobon Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2009
    Posts:
    469
  15. zfactor

    zfactor Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2005
    Posts:
    6,012
    Location:
    on my zx10-r
    i have not really had a issue with .net but i agree i would rather use non .net software personally...
     
  16. alexandrud

    alexandrud Developer

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2011
    Posts:
    1,230
    Location:
    Romania
    I have a question for the users who use one or another Windows Firewall controllers. Why do you use the one that you use ? Why would you prefer a specific one instead of another ? We have 3 programs in this category:

    Windows Firewall Control
    - Latest version: 3.8.2.1
    - Latest update: 20.01.2013
    - Status: In development
    - URL: http://www.binisoft.org/wfc.php

    TinyWall
    - Latest version: 2.0.1
    - Latest update: 18.06.2012
    - Status: Unknown
    - URL: http://tinywall.pados.hu

    Windows Firewall Notifier
    - Latest version:1.7.0
    - Latest update: 28.04.2012
    - Status: Unknown
    - URL: http://wokhan.online.fr/progs.php?sec=WFN

    I am very curious. Please be honest. Thank you.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2013
  17. siketa

    siketa Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2012
    Posts:
    2,695
    Location:
    Zagreb, Croatia
    How do you know that other two are abandoned?
    AFAIK, Wokhan has announced full support for Win8 in the next version.
     
  18. alexandrud

    alexandrud Developer

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2011
    Posts:
    1,230
    Location:
    Romania
    I guessed, because there was no update in the last 9 months. This says a lot. Windows Vista, 7 and 8, share almost the same Windows Filtering Platform. So, what works on Windows 7, and is based on WFP, should work on Windows 8 without problems. I changed the status to "Unknown".
     
  19. mrtonyg

    mrtonyg Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Posts:
    35
    Location:
    USA
    Windows Firewall Notifier (WFN):

    1- Low RAM usage (and only when notifying...out of memory if no notifications)
    2- Runs only when the windows firewall log writes a "block" entry
    3- No Install (just unzip and configure)
     
  20. Ring0

    Ring0 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2010
    Posts:
    66
    I can not understand, why do you always go out of your level of knowledge ? One thing would be to develop a GUI, another
    thing is to understand how windows work.

    Windows Firewall Control
    - URL: http://www.binisoft.org/wfc.php
    - Status: GUI, employee of a some service without any need, developer does not understand firewall logic, exceeding RAM usage like video rendering software, hampers users, not free, in development

    TinyWall
    - URL: http://tinywall.pados.hu
    - Status: developer does not understand firewall logic

    Windows Firewall Notifier

    - URL: http://wokhan.online.fr/progs.php?sec=WFN

    - Status: extends the default Windows embedded firewall behavior, not dependent of any service, configuration provides
    no limit, free. In development.


    More honest than that you can not. ;-)

    siketa, kako u lijepa naša, volim
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2013
  21. alexandrud

    alexandrud Developer

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2011
    Posts:
    1,230
    Location:
    Romania
    I forgot to mention. The questions wasn't for Ring0. :)
    - It is sad, that from all the words, you have a preference for the word.
    - Just because we don't agree about the DNS Client service, this doesn't mean I don't understand the firewall logic.
    - When every 400$ cheap laptop comes with 4GB RAM by default, 30-50MB RAM usage can't be called excessive memory usage. Why do you expect a modern software to have the same low memory usage, like in the era when if you had 128MB RAM in your computer you had a super computer ?
    - Hampers ? I think it helps, this is why thousands of users use it.
    - I invite you to spend more than two years of your life to create something and then give it for free. :)
    - Being in development isn't bad. Is abandonware better because is not updated ?
    - The others two extend the default Windows Firewall behavior as well.
    - If you disable DNS Client service and you are behind a router, instead of the real remote IP address of the outgoing blocked connection, you will see also the IP address of your gateway, your router's IP. The same situation with WFC. So, it is dependent on some service to see the real remote IP in the notification window.
    - Configuration provides no limit o_O Let's be serious. What can you do with WFN and can't do with the other programs ?

    - WFN doesn't run all the time, but the Task Scheduler which calls WFN runs all the time. So, a program runs in background. It doesn't work on Windows 8 because it uses Task Scheduler to monitor the firewall log. Task Scheduler was a wrong approach that I also used in WFC in the past, before creating a Windows service for specialized tasks.

    Ring0, thank you for sharing. I know that we are on a forum, but we don't have to use words to offend other people or their work, just because we don't like it. I think in the real life, you don't speak like that with your colleagues.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2013
  22. safeguy

    safeguy Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2010
    Posts:
    1,718
    @alexandrud

    I don't use WF "controllers". I already gave my reason earlier here. Anyway, I appreciate that you're working on a program like this. Since you asked for honest opinion, here's mine. Please take it more of a friendly feedback than criticism:

    1. Windows Firewall Control folder in %ProgramFiles%. There's an added ACE that allows Everyone Full Control access. There shouldn't be 1 as it goes against default ACLs since Vista and above...

    Look at this:
    New ACLs Improve Security in Windows Vista

    Furthermore, SRP and AppLocker users have to look out for this and make the necessary changes.

    2. Maybe I'm missing it but I don't see a window that displays connections. That can be useful.

    3. I understand the need to earn cash and I respect your business model and licensing system. Personally, the lack of notifications in the free version isn't a deal breaker for me but may be for others. The thing is when you've got competitors that allows notifications even in their 'free' versions, there's bound to be users that look upon that as one of the deciding factors. Maybe consider a full-featured trial version?
     
  23. Scoobs72

    Scoobs72 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2007
    Posts:
    1,108
    Location:
    Sofa (left side)
    I raised this issue with Alexandrud a few weeks ago but he doesn't consider it a security issue. :eek:
     
  24. erim

    erim Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2006
    Posts:
    43
    I use the one that you didn't mention. ;)
    It just seems like a solid program and it doesn't depend on .NET.
    The free version is missing a feature or two, but I still find it usable.
     
  25. pandlouk

    pandlouk Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2007
    Posts:
    2,566
    Hi alexandrud.
    for me a firewall controller should be:
    a) not intrusive
    b) portable (if possible)
    Let me explain:
    a) No pop ups. Should display the active connections so a user can select/find the program he wants permit to pass through the wall. (tinywall's interface is better in this regard)
    b) after is configured I want to be able to close/uninstall the program without loosing the configuration from the windows firewall (windows firewall notifier and your first version of Firewall Control are superb in this)

    Panagiotis
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.