ZoneAlarm 2010 line released

Discussion in 'other firewalls' started by QBgreen, Aug 31, 2009.

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

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I don't want to speak too soon but from what I have seen so far ZAES v9 is one of the best complete security suites I have ever used. It has a relatively low resource usage, runs smoothly, it has state of the art security features, its highly compatible, it seems to work well with other ASW software like SAS and MBAM, and has a low number of annoying alerts to deal with. The ForceField browser security support with the virtualization component for BOTH the IE and Firefox browsers is a HUGE plus and was a major factor in my decision to go with ZAES v9.

    I have just ZAES v9 for security software running on my PIII 1Ghz notebook with 512MB RAM, Windows XP Home SP3, and it runs efficiently enough to make that old notebook very usable for common web browsing, multimedia viewing, etc.. It runs better than when I was using the combination of NAV 2003 along with ZA Free for security on it seven years ago. :eek:
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2009
  2. NNard

    NNard Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Posts:
    42
    Location:
    New York
    Hi SoCalReviews:

    Are you still using NOD32 with any of your setups?
     
  3. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    NNard, I am still using the combo of ZAP 8.x and NOD v2.7 with SAS Pro on four machines. One other machine that is not used online much is only using NOD v2.7 with the WinXP FW enabled. My personal desktop and notebook are running ZAES v9 and SAS Pro. The ZAP 8.x and NOD 2.7 machines might be slightly less resource intensive but not that much more than the systems using the ZAES v9. In a few months I will decide if I want to convert those four business systems to using ZAES v9 instead of using the ZAP with NOD combo.

    I have not determined what the difference would be using ZAP v9 along with NOD v4 but I would guess that it would be similar to the ZAP v8 with NOD v2.7 combo since the new ZA v9 products are a bit faster and more efficient than previous versions and that would make up for NOD v4 being a little less efficient than NOD v2.7.

    I don't recommend than anyone else do this but for the record...on my personal desktop I found that you can use NOD v2.7 along with ZAES v9 as long as you have the AV component (especially on demand) in ZAES turned completely off. ZAES will give you a nag screen warning about NOD v2.7 every time your system boots and every time you try to access the AV settings in ZAES. However, I have chosen to use ZAES with its AV instead of NOD v2.7. I have not tried ZAES v9 along with NOD v4 and I don't have any plans to since these are not test systems so I don't want to take too many chances with potential incompatibility problems.

    I know you mentioned that you are using ZAP v9 with NOD v4 and it works well for you. I still have not tried that combination but I might in the near future.:)
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2009
  4. thathagat

    thathagat Guest

    hey SoCalReviews with zaes v9 does the full ultra deep scan show 99% when completed or 100%....?
     
  5. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Hi thathagat, several AV with ASW scans have run since I installed ZAES v9 on my desktop (using Windows XP Pro SP3) about a week ago...two manual and at least two auto scheduled (with at least one being an ultra deep scan) and I did not notice the scans stopping at 99%. Most of the scans ran when the computer was idle although one scan may have run while I used the system as I remember they all appeared to complete to 100%. I don't know if you are wondering about a bug in a previous release and there might be special conditions that generate the problem but on my systems I did not notice that problem.
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2009
  6. thathagat

    thathagat Guest

    well its strange here though.........
     

    Attached Files:

  7. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,899
    Location:
    localhost
    yes, I saw the same... just a GUI glitch :)
    If you have the scanning window hidden, you will only see the yellow pop-up in the system tray indicating the completion of the scan.

    Fax
     
  8. SoCalReviews

    SoCalReviews Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2006
    Posts:
    282
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    That certainly makes sense if the hidden scan went to 99% and then switched to a completed pop up which essentially would represent the same thing as being 100% completed. Now that I think about it I think that may have been what happened when the scans ran on my desktop system. That is a different issue than if it was stuck at 99% without finishing and I know I didn't see that happen. I wonder if this so called GUI "scan percentage completion glitch" will be fixed for the next release. :doubt:
     
    Last edited: Sep 8, 2009
  9. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,899
    Location:
    localhost
    Thats correct... the scan is completed and the "close" window option is given, so just a minor display issue. :)

    Fax
     
  10. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,899
    Location:
    localhost
    New ZA Extreme and AV BETA 9.0.108.000

     
  11. loli22

    loli22 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Posts:
    92
    i noticed when i installed ZAES 9 under xp sp3, my laptop take longer to boot up.

    is there any remedy?
     
  12. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,899
    Location:
    localhost
    Yes, its normal unless its 3 minutes :D
    I have a delay of around 12-15 seconds... (Core2, VISTA SP2, 4GIGA RAM) that should more than manageable if you do not boot your system every 10 minutes.

    Delay depends normally on the CPU, RAM and age of the system (older? More seconds needed...). Also note that ZAX needs around 20 days to learn your system during this time the boot is slower. More the first days less and less towards then end.

    Fax
     
    Last edited: Sep 19, 2009
  13. bierni86

    bierni86 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2009
    Posts:
    17
    ZA Pro FW dosen't include Keylogger prevention:( I thought, I could replace GW with ZA...
     
  14. Chubb

    Chubb Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2005
    Posts:
    1,967
    The latest version of ZoneAlarm Pro is 9.0.136.000, available from the free license deal...
     
  15. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,899
    Location:
    localhost
    Yes, it does have keylogger protection provided by the ZA OSfirewall. Not sure how broad is the coverage. ZA forcefield (in ZA Extreme) has also a keyloggers jamming protection. :)

    Cheers,
    Fax
     
  16. volvic

    volvic Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Posts:
    220
    How do you know that?

    Which version of the engine is it using?

    Is that why it is incompatible with KAV / KIS?
     
  17. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
    i dont understand why zonealarm needs my phone number and address for checkout...
     
  18. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,899
    Location:
    localhost
    To CALL HOME :D
     
  19. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    6,104
    Location:
    USA
  20. firzen771

    firzen771 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Posts:
    4,815
    Location:
    Canada
  21. Victek

    Victek Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Posts:
    6,104
    Location:
    USA
    .
    Glad you got it. By the way, the version number is 9.0.136, up from 9.0.114. I haven't been able to find a changelog yet. I'm running .114 and wondering if it's worth uninstalling since .136 is not being offered through automatic updates (yet). If anyone finds a changelog please post it or link to it.
    .
    Update:

    In the forum ZA support says the changelog is currently unavailable.
     
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2009
  22. jlo

    jlo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Posts:
    475
    Location:
    UK
  23. fax

    fax Registered Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2005
    Posts:
    3,899
    Location:
    localhost
    Interesting... ZA was not even setup correctly.
    HIPS and virtualization were basically OFF.

    On top, for a proper testing, they should have gone to the evil sites and not just running executables up to when you find one that pass the tool. Makes no sense... o_O

    Fax
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.