Why should I never install these popular firewalls?

I read "Don't Forever Alter Your Computer! Don't Install or Use Anything with Kaspersky, Zone Alarm or AOL, including AOL Active Virus Shield!" at https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=175242

Can anyone explain?

 

That's all a matter of opinion.
I have used ZA free before with no problems,so I have no idea what the problem is with ZA.

*Edit Kaspersky issue discussed in this long thread.

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=176061

 

Hello,
it is one person's personal rant.
i use kaspersky with no issues.
aol active virus shield is just a cut down version of kaspersky.
if you want to try kaspersky then do so.
dont let one person's opinion get in the way.
i used to have windows doing a few chkdisc wanting to run at reboot.
i dont have that issue with the last three builds i have used.
lodore

 

Its not teh firewall theyre complaining about, its teh AV -> KAV engine.

Something about chkdsk and personal identifiers in the files...I dont know or care and if you want to try KAV/KIS then do so. Its runs well and provides excellent protection.

 

Hi, folks: I think I know why does she warn us about ZA; ZA has a hidden call-home device planted deeply in your BOX and would not ,to this day, admit or deny its presence. A similar discovery has been echoed by one of our members in firewall thread. Do you feel nervous if someone has planted a monitor device in your bedroom and would not acknowledge it ?

 

Many of us use Kaspersky with complete satisfaction. Try it yourself and ignore the rant.
Regards,
Jerry

 

Hi, folks: I used KAV before and having no ill-feeling or similar towards it. It is a top-notched AV/ISS. Although KAV has a side track incident regarding to its AV protection, which can be turned off by some malwares thru changing its licence date. The good news is KAV has fixed this bug. As to ZA pro, to this day, I still have deep reservation about its strength: my ZA pro v.7.0.337 's true vector service was turned off by another app's routine scan.

 

I had a long history of using Zone Alarm. I used free for some years then I ended up at Pro and Suite. On my recent XP sp2 Home machine I "tried" to use Zone Alarm, but the new version of Zone Alarm Suite seemed to slow down my machine and the new version of Zone Alarm Pro seemed to really cause conflicts. In both cases of the aforementioned new versions I only had Nod32 and Spybot w/ teatimer running with Zone Alarm.

Anyway, I might have possibly tolerated the new version of Zone Alarm Suite slowing things if it was actually significantly and substantially better than the rest and it needed to slow things in order to garner superior results. However, the aforementioned Zone Alarm issues, among other things, made me look for something other than Zone Alarm to use in a hurry. Personally, based solely on my own experience with Zone Alarm, I "feel" that"something" has dramatically changed with the product.

I wanted to find "hard research", or trials, that compared the various security products. I looked at av-comparitives, etc, matousec, and others.

I was prepared to spend money to buy a firewall, for instance, if it was "clearly above the rest", but personally I just could not ignore Comodo Firewall Pro's performance in the tests I looked at. I now use Comodo Firewall Pro, but I sure wish I could find a good manual or helpfile for Comodo Firewall Pro because, to me, it is difficult to understand how to configure it, etc. It would be great to find a Comodo instruction "thread" like the one Blackspear authored for Nod32.

http://www.matousec.com/projects/windows-personal-firewall-analysis/leak-tests-results.php I looked at the matousec comparisons recently. I just don't see why I would buy one of the others, especially considering the ordeals I went through with various trials when the "king of the hill" appears, for my own purposes at least, to be Comodo Firewall Pro. I just wish I could find a good Comodo manual or help file.

http://www.geekstogo.com/forum/thes...ean-XP-sp2-machine-now-invulnera-t165600.html

All in all I am having quite an ordeal trying to find effective security applications for my XP sp2 machine. I am just an "average computer user", if that, so, especially recently, I really try to find objective comparisons and tests on which to base my choices. When the product is not free this is even more important.

There is a magazine/organization in the USA called "Consumer Report". I used to actually have some folks that I know who had a subscription send me the back issues they were discarding. "Consumer Report", at least at the time, emphasized delivering the objective facts. They tested the products and recorded the results(minimum subjectivity). Problem is that it is painfully clear, to me at least, that many manufacturers do not want the objective truth about their products known to the masses.

I am aware of many of them not allowing truly independent testing and/or making a "big stink" when some entity does manage to objectively report the facts. To my recollection certain hybrid auto manufacturers had an absolute "tantrum" when Consumer Report published what I was personally quite convinced of long before Consumer Report tested the hybrids. Consumer report essentially showed that the hybrids they tested don't save the average person any money over gasolines when the additional cost of hybrids, etc., are factored in. The manufacturers, from my perspective, made such a "big stink" that, surprisingly and disappointingly, Consumer Report actually ended up changing its conclusions; or at least it looked that way to me. Consumer Report, to my eyes, retracted some of their findings and issued a new statement saying that one of the cars would actually save the consumer a couple hundred dollars or something to that effect. To me that couple hundred dollars could have easily entailed the error factor(+ or -) in the testing procedures so maybe CR was not bowing to pressure as much as it appeared. I myself am fuzzy on the details now, but I kind of lost respect for CR after that.

Anyway, I try to limit what I believe as far as a manufacturers descripiton, software or otherwise. If relevant to the product, I go looking for reviews and comparison tests right away IF use of the product involves me putting "a lot on the line" in terms of my safety, privacy, wallet, whatever.

Considering my significant use of ZA in the past I was very much interested in knowing what Mele20 might know that I don't. I also wanted to find out if I had "Forever Altered My Computer". That whole signature line could be an excellent marketing tactic for some competing firm. I know I would have clicked on a link saying that.

Incidentally, I try to run from anything that has the name AOL on it. In fact, some girl with an AOL shirt on, that I thought was Pam Anderson , walked up to me at a convention some years back. After I finished running I was in the next county. Went back the next day to get my car and went inside hoping that she had changed shirts.

So that is what AOL does to me personally.

 

I dont know if it is something wrong with my browsers, but when I click the link provided I get to a thread about bumping old thread Called "Prohibit resurrecting very old threads" Nothing about popular firewalls....

 

sukarof look at the "signature line" of Mele20, the person who started that thread( https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=175242 ). That "signature line" sparked the "big debate" that you found here.

 

I think it probably has to do with this AV feature:

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r18608452-Kaspersky-You-lost-me-at-ISwift

 

The original topic question appears to be misstated. The issue is not with firewalls (AOL AVS is not a firewall program). The Kaspersky Anti-hacker firewall program is not the issue. The Zone Alarm firewall "calling home" issue was supposedly addressed in version 6.1.744.001 which dealt with the program trying to connect to the ZA website when searching for program updates. Zone Alarm AV uses the Kaspersky AV engine as does the AOL AVS program. All three (KAV, AOL AVS, and ZA AV/ZAISS) would appear to have some issue with altering your files on your computer which can only be resolved with a total reload of the O.S. That is what the main discussion was about. The topic was on Antivirus and not firewall software. So this message thread is technically in the wrong forum.

 

If someone who looked like Pamela Anderson walked up to me, I don't think that I would run away even if she was wearing an AOL logo shirt (especially a wet one).

 

Maybe you should unless you like silicone.