What's the lighest Firewall for Vista?

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by tonyseeking, Apr 16, 2009.

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

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    What Firewall runs the lightest on Vista?
     
  2. siberianwolf

    siberianwolf Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2009
    Posts:
    516
    1) built-in win-fw
    2) agnitum
    imo.
     
  3. Taliscicero

    Taliscicero Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2008
    Posts:
    1,439
  4. Kerodo

    Kerodo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2004
    Posts:
    7,780
    Yep, would have to be built-in Win Firewall, or better yet, just a router.
     
  5. JohnnyDollar

    JohnnyDollar Guest

    Other than vista's built in firewall, vista firewall control is lite.
     
  6. zapjb

    zapjb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Posts:
    3,518
    Location:
    USA - Back in a real State in time for a real Pres
    My vote as well.
     
  7. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    I am using Vista firewall now. But what is agnitum? :blink:
     
  8. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    I use Wireless Broadband, only have a USB key modem.

    Any other ideas?
     
  9. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    What is vista firewall control?
     
  10. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
  11. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    Thanks Stem.

    Just installed the free version.

    Is the free version useful? because it says I need to buy the Plus version to get System/Core application protection and Extended Security Zones Set and Extended Options Set.

    I am not sure what those 3 things are or what they do...... Are they essential for me to have? And does this make the free version rather risky and useless seeing it doesn't support System/Core application protection and Extended Security Zones Set and Extended Options Set?

    Thanks.:thumb:
     
  12. tipstir

    tipstir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    SFL, USA
    PC Tools Firewall Plus 3.14 I've tested on Vista Business works very well..
     
  13. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    I am not so much after something that works well, but rather a very light firewall.

    I think Vista Firewall Control is perfect for what I am after.

    But I am waiting for Stem to answer my questions so I am more informed about some things I do not yet understand.
     
  14. tipstir

    tipstir Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Posts:
    830
    Location:
    SFL, USA
    Vista Firewall Control, okay this one I heard about last year and did try it back I gone back to the PC Tools Firewall Plus 3.14.
     
  15. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    I have just looked at both the free and full versions.

    It really depends on what control you want. As example, if you would normally be running windows Vista with a policy of "allow outbound not blocked", then the free version will intercept such as IE/ windows defender and would think any 3rd party applications. and will give you the basic application internet access control. But the free version will not control, for example, the services host(svchost) so you would need to at least protect windows service with blocking unsolicited inbound and manually adding any outbound rules(for possible restrictions) for such as svchost using the Vista firewall. So that is really what the "core protection" is, the ability to control the traffic of the windows system applications.
    The "Extended Security Zones Set and Extended Options Set?", that is basically a group of pre-defined rules which can be applied, such as only allowing an FTP client the rules for an FTP client, rather that just a base option of allowing all outbound as with the free version. There is also control of traffic on a per NIC basis, and other options such as logging, port forwarding.


    Hope that helps,

    - Stem
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2009
  16. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    Thanks Stem,

    So not having control, for example, the services host(svchost) and not having the ability to control the traffic of the windows system applications, makes this free version very limited and still puts my Vista in risk... because I assume if I ever get infected with something nasty at the core level, then this free version won't help me at all? :doubt:

    Stem... what other free firewall is available, the lightest one in your experience, that will give me protection even at the services host(svchost) and core levels?

    I removed Vista Firewall Control already. What shall I use now in your opinion?
     
  17. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    I have not yet tested any firewall on Vista, so not sure how they react.

    Why not use the Vista firewall?


    - Stem
     
  18. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    I am using the Vista Firewall right now. However, it doesn't support HIPS and doesn't support 2 way. So I always assumed if something infects me, the Vista Firewall will not stop it sending my personal details out to someone "out there".

    I thought that is the reason for having 2 way firewall? :blink:
     
  19. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    The Vista firewall does have 2 way filtering, it just need enabling:- "Administrative tools - Windows firewall with advanced security- properties"

    For HIPS, you do have the limited user accounts and the execution prevention. You can add an AV and/or possibly a 3rd party HIPS, but personally, even being a long time user of HIPS, I would not currently install one onto Vista. I prefer to follow a more preventative direction of stopping the malware/viri getting resident in the first place.
     
  20. JohnnyDollar

    JohnnyDollar Guest

    comodo is pretty lite. You could install it without the defense + and without the antivirus and have a pretty configurable firewall. If you want hips then install it with the defense +. The defense plus is pretty talkative.
     
  21. Fedorov999

    Fedorov999 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2002
    Posts:
    182
  22. Stem

    Stem Firewall Expert

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2005
    Posts:
    4,948
    Location:
    UK
    Something to consider when choosing a firewall for Vista, is for that firewall to filter ALL direct comms made to/from that OS. This means for Vista the filtering of IPV6, also the filtering of the IPV6 over IPV4 (Teredo tunneling), which is intended to allow the nat of IPV6 over an IPV4 router.

    I know a lot of users chase firewalls that contain "leak" prevention, for myself, if a firewall cannot control/filter a protocol and simply allows that protocol in/out. then that to me is a "Leak"

    - Stem
     
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2009
  23. AKAJohnDoe

    AKAJohnDoe Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2007
    Posts:
    989
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    I think "lightest" is the wrong question; rather, function, features, price, support, ....
     
  24. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
    I loaded properties in Administrative tools - Windows firewall with advanced security.. But what do I do now?
     
  25. tonyseeking

    tonyseeking Former Poster

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2008
    Posts:
    406
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.