Which Firewall is appropriate for me?

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by ActionJackson, Apr 3, 2008.

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

    ActionJackson Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Posts:
    3
    Hello,

    I'am looking for a Firewall that provides the following requirements:

    1.
    Free.

    2.
    No leak protection, HIPS or other stuff like that.

    3.
    ...but nonetheless good inbound and outbound protection. For example, I like the Jetico Firewall when it comes to that point, but there are a few points that are disturbing (serious system stability issues, not free).

    4.
    Should be able to easily being switched off and then really be off, not some subprocesses still running in the background.

    5.
    Vista x64 support if possible.


    Any suggestion are greatly appreciated, even if some points maybe don't fit. I am looking for a replacement of the XP/Vista firewall which I find terrible. Yes, I know there are maybe some Firewalls out there that provide all my required features where the HIPS can be turned of but I don't like to do that because the more protection they offer the deeper they're digging into the system, even if you turn those features off.
    So if you know any that I could like, please let me know. Thanks.
     
  2. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    LnS (?)
     
  3. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069
    Isn't that one expensive ?
     
  4. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    Yep, it isn't free, but it fulfills most of the OP's requirements (no HIPS, easy on/off, good packet filtering, beta support for x64 IIRC)
     
  5. InVitroVeritas

    InVitroVeritas Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2008
    Posts:
    64
    I'd say PC Tools FW+
     
  6. Seer

    Seer Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2007
    Posts:
    1,596
    Location:
    Singidunum
    I was going to say that, but unfortunately it still does not have x64 support. As it is being actively developed - a strong point - we may soon see this. A decent firewall and worth trying.

    Vista firewall?
     
  7. Coolio10

    Coolio10 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Posts:
    1,124
    Comodo has those specifications.
    It is free, has a firewall only option, support vista x64.
    The only outbound protection is basic though so only 1 firewall alert per app but it cant detect other apps using other apps connecting.
     
  8. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    He doesn't want unnecessary hooks/drivers.
     
  9. subset

    subset Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Posts:
    825
    Location:
    Austria
    Well, Vista x64 support, there are not too many.
    Besides Comodo and LnS there is the Webroot Firewall (currently free) and Jetico 2 (paid).

    Cheers
     
  10. shadek

    shadek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2008
    Posts:
    2,363
    Location:
    Sweden
    Windows built-in firewall provides excellent inbound/outbound protection. I honestly can't see why you wouldn't use it when you have these criterias of yours.
     
  11. Mrkvonic

    Mrkvonic Linux Systems Expert

    Joined:
    May 9, 2005
    Posts:
    8,695
    Hello,
    Well then, Sygate, Kerio 2.1.5, maybe ZA free? Not really Vista x64 compatible, but then, nothing is.
    Mrk
     
  12. MikeNAS

    MikeNAS Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2006
    Posts:
    697
    Location:
    FiNLAND
    With XP I always use GhostWall. Vista... I don't use it because GhostWall doesn't work with it :D
     
  13. zorbis

    zorbis Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Posts:
    27
    Why don't you give "vista firewall control" a try?, it works alongside the windows native firewall adding extra outbound protection to it, very easy to use, no HIPS or D+ or other things like that, low on system resources and vista 64 bit compatible. It is available in both a free version and a paid for one (personally i'm trying the free version at the moment and i been happy with it so far), for more information you can visit the sphinx software website:

    http://www.sphinx-soft.com/

    p.s. if you are going to give it a go i would like to share your experience on this firewall (just p.m. me on here if you don't mind)..Ciao for now.
     
  14. aeonhuang

    aeonhuang Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2008
    Posts:
    7
    I think comodo is a good choice!You can install its firewall only and NOT install D+.:rolleyes:
     
  15. Peter2150

    Peter2150 Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2003
    Posts:
    17,041
    Removed two posts one of which was a bit inflammatory and the other a response over the top.

    Pete
     
  16. ActionJackson

    ActionJackson Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2008
    Posts:
    3
    Hi,

    thanks for all your suggestions.

    first of all I have to say, I still have WinXP 32bit running. I plan to switch to Vista x64 soon, that's why I asked for possible x64 support.

    I checked the firewall control from sphinx-soft for WinXP, but it isn't quite for me. But the Vista version could definitely be an option due to better outbound control.

    I also checked PCTools FW+ and LooknStop Firewall, both are nice programs, especially LnS. But both of them also seem to offer some intrusion protection.

    Comodo is overloaded like hell. Nonetheless I gave it a try and I find the firewall interface pretty nice. I chose the install mode without the HIPS (so called defense+) from the beginning. Which is now a bit confusing, the defense+ menu is still there but you can play around with the switches as you want, it does not matter, seems to be in fact completely inactive. What attracted my attention was the checkbox where you can enable and disable the HIPS because a restart is needed for that, which leads me to think that maybe the unloved HIPS system invasions (or the hooks as some of you called it) are entirely removed by that. What do the experts say?
    Maybe some people find this discussion totally ridiculous but I can tell you, these Firewalls are digging deep deep into the system and have the potential to put your whole system integrity into jeopardy, wouldn't be the first time for me. That's why I am looking for a firewall that has the least system interference possible.

    By the way the main reason why I don't like the XP/Vista firewall is that they are not able to give you alerts if an application tries to connect to network.

    greetings
     
    Last edited: Apr 6, 2008
  17. lucas1985

    lucas1985 Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2006
    Posts:
    4,047
    Location:
    France, May 1968
    If you have a disk-image app, make an image before testing and install Comodo and an antirootkit tool like RootKit Hook Analyzer. See if the hooks with or without D+ enabled are the same.
     
  18. Escalader

    Escalader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Posts:
    3,710
    Location:
    Land of the Mooses
    Sorry but I don't know of 1 FW which meets all your needs and doesn't make hooks into the system.

    It's kind of like asking for your gall blader to be removed without having a surgeon make an incision.

    If you want free on xp try PC Tools, OA 2 free, or ZA Free.

    If you want free on vista there is the M$ in/out that come with Vista but you will have to study and work to get it optimized. If you MUST have a 3rd party vista FW wait for PC Tools, I think that would be my choice tonight unless OA gets their first. I'm in no rush for vista little or no gain for some pain.

    The other free vista I think is ZA but I'm out of date on that company now so go to their web site and look.
     
  19. Paranoid2000

    Paranoid2000 Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    2,839
    Location:
    North West, United Kingdom
    Points 2 and 3 conflict (you can't have good outbound protection without some element of leakproofing/process control) but point 1 is likely to be the biggest limitation. Point 4 you can forget about - any modern firewall will include a network driver which stays on your system until uninstalled.

    Oddly enough, the almost obsolete Outpost Free would fulfil all your points except the last (no Vista support at all) but I wouldn't recommend it. Ghostwall is another option but doesn't offer application filtering (which post#16 implies is necessary).

    I think you may be better served with something like AppDefend or System Safety Monitor (paid) which both offer outbound network control (and other features which can be switched off) alongside Windows firewall (or a router firewall) to filter incoming traffic. However Vista x64 is hostile territory for third-party security software and until MS changes this, ZA Free may be as good as it gets.
     
  20. Escalader

    Escalader Registered Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Posts:
    3,710
    Location:
    Land of the Mooses
    Hi Paranoid2000:

    FWIW, I think you have hit the nail on the FW head. :cool:
     
  21. Kees1958

    Kees1958 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Posts:
    5,857
    Have a look at VistaFireWallControl is free and easy and good. Uses Vista FW kernel.
     
  22. Fly

    Fly Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2007
    Posts:
    2,069
    Does that Vista FW kernel also offer complete protection against wireless inbound attacks ?
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.