XP Firewall or ZoneAlarm?

[Sam Woodson]

Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)

Thanks,
--
Sam Woodson

[Bruce Chambers]

Greetings --

WinXP's built-in firewall is fine at stopping incoming attacks, and
hiding all of your ports from probes. It doesn't give you any alarms
to tell you that it is working, though. What WinXP also does not do,
is protect you from any Trojans or spyware that you might download and
install inadvertently. It doesn't monitor out-going traffic at all,
much less block (or at least ask you about) the bad or the
questionable out-going packets.

ZoneAlarm or Sygate are much better, and there are a free
versions
available. Personally, I've been very happy with Symantec's Norton
Internet Security 2002 (NIS 2003 is now available), which includes
Norton AntiVirus, Norton Personal Firewall, parental controls, privacy
controls, and ad blocking. (Just the elimination of most pop-up ads
on the Internet made the price worth-while to me.)


Bruce Chambers

--
Help us help you:
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html

You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on
having both at once. -- RAH


"Sam Woodson" > wrote in message
...
> Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
> Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Sam Woodson
>
>
>

[AArDvarK]

Use both at the same time, I do.
Alex

"Sam Woodson" > wrote in message
...
> Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
> Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Sam Woodson
>
>
>

[MIke Miles]

Bruce:

What's your opinion on McAfee? I have v 7 but I'm scared
to death to put it on XP (had some bad problems with
98se). Is Norton good with XP?



>-----Original Message-----
>Greetings --
>
> WinXP's built-in firewall is fine at stopping incoming
attacks, and
>hiding all of your ports from probes. It doesn't give
you any alarms
>to tell you that it is working, though. What WinXP also
does not do,
>is protect you from any Trojans or spyware that you
might download and
>install inadvertently. It doesn't monitor out-going
traffic at all,
>much less block (or at least ask you about) the bad or
the
>questionable out-going packets.
>
> ZoneAlarm or Sygate are much better, and there are
a free
>versions
>available. Personally, I've been very happy with
Symantec's Norton
>Internet Security 2002 (NIS 2003 is now available),
which includes
>Norton AntiVirus, Norton Personal Firewall, parental
controls, privacy
>controls, and ad blocking. (Just the elimination of
most pop-up ads
>on the Internet made the price worth-while to me.)
>
>
>Bruce Chambers
>
>--
>Help us help you:
>http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm
>http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
>
>You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't
ever count on
>having both at once. -- RAH
>
>
>"Sam Woodson" > wrote in
message
...
>> Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
>> Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Sam Woodson
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>.
>

[Jose Francisco]

Greetings Sam,

I'll give a thumbs up to the in-built firewall of Windows XP :)

Regards,
Jose Francisco

--
Still Got Problems? Email Me!

*Note* Always do a Windows Update

http://www.betaconnect.com

"Sam Woodson" > wrote in message
...
> Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
> Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>
> Thanks,
> --
> Sam Woodson
>
>
>

[Ken Blake]

In ,
Sam Woodson > typed:

> Which is better? (Higher level of protection)


ZoneAlarm


> Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)


It doesn't matter. Both are insignificant.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup

[Ken Blake]

In ,
Jose Francisco > typed:


> I'll give a thumbs up to the in-built firewall of Windows XP :)


Note that Windows built-in firewall monitors incoming traffic
only, unlike better firewalls, which monitor traffic in both
directions.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup


> "Sam Woodson" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
>> Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>>
>> Thanks,
>> --
>> Sam Woodson
>>

Sorry for interrupting your interesting convesation. It just occurred to me
that my XPHome has both ZA and XP Firewall turned on. Would it be better if
I turned off my XP firewall and leave ZA?

Thank much.

P
-----
"Ken Blake" > wrote in message
...
> In ,
> Sam Woodson > typed:
>
> > Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
>
>
> ZoneAlarm
>
>
> > Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>
>
> It doesn't matter. Both are insignificant.
>
> --
> Ken Blake
> Please reply to the newsgroup

[Ken Blake]

In ,
phelp <phelp> typed:

> Sorry for interrupting your interesting convesation. It just
occurred
> to me that my XPHome has both ZA and XP Firewall turned on.
Would it
> be better if I turned off my XP firewall and leave ZA?


I would turn off the XP firewall. It's just a duplication of
effort. It's doing nothing that ZA isn't also doing, and there
may be some chance of a conflict between the two.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup



> "Ken Blake" > wrote in message
> ...
>> In ,
>> Sam Woodson > typed:
>>
>> > Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
>>
>>
>> ZoneAlarm
>>
>>
>> > Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>>
>>
>> It doesn't matter. Both are insignificant.
>>
>> --
>> Ken Blake
>> Please reply to the newsgroup

[Rick]

Sam Woodson wrote:
> Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
> Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>
> Thanks,
Use both

[Ken Blake]

In ,
Rick > typed:

> Sam Woodson wrote:
>> Which is better? (Higher level of protection)
>> Which requires less system resources? (Memory and CPU?)
>>
>> Thanks,

> Use both


Why? The built-in firewall does nothing that ZoneAlarm doesn't
also do. Using both does nothing extra for you, creates extra
overhead, and introduces the risk of interference between the
two.

--
Ken Blake
Please reply to the newsgroup