Would appreciate simple non-technical answer

Discussion in 'ESET NOD32 Antivirus' started by gberns, Dec 11, 2007.

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

    gberns Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    131
    I am not new to computers nor am I particularly stupid. However the threads on 3.0's uses of proxies, etc have left me totally confused. Therefore let me pose a hopefully simple question which, again hopefully, will allow a simple answer.

    I am running NOD3.0 under Vista 32 using the Windows Firewall for incoming protection supplemented by Vista Firewall Control for outgoing. I am not behind any hardware routers and depend solely upon software protection. Would I be better protected by switching to the ESET suite with its firewall?

    In addition to a simple yes or no, a short sentence or two as to why would also be appreciated.

    Many, many thanks.

    Gary
     
  2. Nodrog

    Nodrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Posts:
    56
    Location:
    UK
    There is no proxy issue if you are using the ESS "suite" - the AV and firewall integrate well and give you all of the granularity you would expect to have i.e. exact rules for each application.

    I run the suite on my 2 visa computers and it seems (touch wood) to work OK [although I wonder about the download speed one or two others have mentioned, not sure if it is just my connection and time of day or if there is something else going on - not tested it fully]

    I would (did) go for the suite (outbound control using the vista firewall is the definition of nightmare!

    regards
    Gordon
     
  3. trjam

    trjam Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Posts:
    9,057
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Simple answer."Yes."
     
  4. NodboN

    NodboN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Posts:
    139
  5. gberns

    gberns Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    131
    I am surprised that with all the posts in the proxy threads that I have only received three answers here and that two of them contained no explanation sentence. I was really hoping for more information to help me make a decision.

    Gary
     
  6. ASpace

    ASpace Guest

    Well , the point of the whole Eset Smart Security is that all modules integrated better (4 modules work together) . If you need SPAM protection , ESS is very good choice .

    ESET Smart Security is a bit more configurable for outgoing protection than WF , however both ESS and WF are excellet when it comes to the most important part - incoming intrusion protection .

    The so called "proxy issues" are no issues , just people who want to find problems in places where there are no problems :thumb:
     
  7. NodboN

    NodboN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Posts:
    139
    Your question was too restrictive . . . . . . it just wasn't possible (for me) to offer a simple explanation to the second part of your question in a short sentence or two as to why switching to the ESET suite with its firewall would protect you better than your Windows Vista firewall. :rolleyes:
     
  8. GAN

    GAN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    Posts:
    355
    I don't think ESS necessarily will give you better protection so i don't find it accurate to say yes or no. If you miss some features or don't like the windows firewall you could try the ESS trial and decide what you prefer, but if you are happy with your current setup then i wouldn't bother. The windows firewall is secure as well, but it's pretty simple and not the most advanced software firewall available.

    I find the windows firewall to do the job i want so wouldn't bother buying another product. I also find ESS to be a bit to buggy at the moment. The same goes for nod32 3.0 and i find 2.7 to be superior. So if you consider ESS i would suggest to wait for the next release and use the trial to see if working ok before you buy the software. If you are happy with your current setup then keep it like that.

    I also have a hardware firewall and if i were you i would rather spend some money buying a hardware firewall in addition to the software firewall. Trojans, worms and virus could try to disable or open up the firewall running on your PC and then the hardware firewall could give you extra protection.
     
  9. gberns

    gberns Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    131
    I am using Spam Butcher for spam protection and Vista FireWall Protection (a free program) for outgoing protection and am reasonably satisfied with both. There seems, therefore, no reason to pay to upgrade to the suite.

    Thank you very much for your short, pithy answer on the proxy issue.

    Gary
     
  10. GWA

    GWA Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2005
    Posts:
    59
    Location:
    Albuquerque, New Mexico
    I'm sorry, but that is a misleading comment. I had to downgrade to NOD32 2.7 in order for my firewall to intercept browser and email traffic. That was not my imagination. If ESET wants everyone to buy the ESS, then only the ESS should be offered for V3. CHUCK
     
  11. HAN

    HAN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Posts:
    2,080
    Location:
    USA
    Respectfully, I emphatically disagree. If one uses a software firewall that has outbound filtering enabled, AND they use Version 3's local proxy filtering, it could indeed be an issue. Just because it's not an issue for some (or you) doesn't mean it's not for others.

    I sincerely hope that Eset doesn't agree with you and believe all these posts are "just people who want to find problems in places where there are no problems" (and I'm not saying they are!) But if they are, then they may end up losing some loyal supporters. Which would be a monumental shame!
     
  12. Nodrog

    Nodrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Posts:
    56
    Location:
    UK
    I still say the windows firewall is a nightmare to manage / in dire need of a usable friendly gui frontend (but maybe that's just me)

    ... you can't argue with it being free though, and the old "if it aint broke don't fix it" might apply if you are happy with what you have.
    [silly question: do all your Windows FW rules for browsing go outbound to Localhost on TCP30606 or are you not scanning browser activity?]

    I would hope the ESS firewall will develop to include some anti leak and hips and get up there with the likes of outpost but yes - that is probably a bit away yet.

    I bought the suite because the extra cost over the AV alone, for a 2 year lic was just a few pounds and I actualy like the layout.

    FWIW I still prefer the old 2.7 gui.

    regards
    Gordon
     
  13. GAN

    GAN Registered Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2007
    Posts:
    355
    Well i guess that's the whole point....if happy with the windows fw then why change. Also it depend what requirements you have. I only want to block incoming connections, don't want any popup every time i start an application unless the application act as a server and listen to a port (like ftp servers, web server etc). Neither do i want to block any outgoing traffic. In that case the windows fw is just fine.
     
  14. gberns

    gberns Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    131
    Well, I thought I had my answer with the answer from HiTech Boy but I just finished reading the thread you started with his quote. Do the points you raise there deal only with Outpost or do they also hold true with the Vista firewall? The answer to this will finally make my decision.

    Gary
     
  15. Nodrog

    Nodrog Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2007
    Posts:
    56
    Location:
    UK
    Hi Gary

    I hadn't specifically tested EAV with the Vista firewall - so did that just now.

    Unfortunately, yes, just the same as Outpost (and we suspect that possibly most software firewalls will have the same [potential] issue).

    I say [potential] because the issue of the proxy and loss of granular control of individual OUTBOUND applications may not be of any concern to some or even arguably most users.

    For example, if you are using the Vista firewall - the default settings are filter all inbound against your ruleset - but - Domain, Private, and Public profiles are set to allow all by default... in this mode, you will not notice any proxy issue at all because you are already allowing all applications all outbound ports. LOTS of people run their firewalls like this and rely on AV and/or hips to make sure there is no malware on their box.

    Personally, I have a strict outbound ruleset as an added layer of security (and it also stops the kids from bypassing some of the filtering I have in place).

    In your original post you said that you do use outbound filtering so I presume you have changed the default profile outbounds to block by default and edited added your own outbound rules.
    (RANT, sorry; I still hate the built in FW is a nightmare to manage, it says you can configure it to prompt when it blocks something but I have never ever seen it do this so each new application you try to configure starts as a guessing game as to what the .exe file is RANT over)

    The answer to your question comes down to what do you need; in particular, just how much control over your apps outbound activity do you need.

    On Vista I bought the suite and like it very much. The integrated AV and firewall does not have the proxy issue.

    regards
    Gordon
     
  16. gberns

    gberns Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2004
    Posts:
    131
    Thanks, Gordon, for your reply. I bought the suite last night as it, in reality, only cost me $14.00 over the renewal price I would have to pay in four months anyway. The first time I installed it I set it for automatic filtering and it let everything call home and this is not my idea of a good situation. I don't trust what some of the cheaper programs are sending every time they load. Am now trying to learn just what I do have to let go out at boot time so my gadgets and spam program work. Can't use the suite for spam as I am a Thunderbird user and Eset doesn't support it yet. Would think they would with the enormous amount of people that use it.

    I really appreciate your help.

    Gary
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.