Firewall

How does the built-in firewall in XP compare with Zone Alarm?

Home User Security: Personal Firewalls
http://www.securityfocus.com/infocus/1750

--
Carey Frisch
Microsoft MVP
Windows XP - Shell/User

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

wrote in message:
...

| How does the built-in firewall in XP compare with Zone Alarm?

Greetings --

WinXP's built-in firewall is fine at stopping incoming attacks, and
hiding 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, Kerio, or Sygate are all much better, and are much more
easily configured, and there are a free versions of each readily
available. Even Symantec's Norton Personal Firewall is superior,
although it does take a heavier toll of performance then do ZoneAlarm,
Kerio, or Sygate.


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


wrote in message
...
How does the built-in firewall in XP compare with Zone Alarm?

The WinXP firewall is in unobtrusive firewall that works and never bugs the
user with so-called "attack" alerts, a barrage of outbound permission
requests mostly from cryptically named dll's etc no one knows how to respond
to and it consumes no resources nor requires any installation as it is
already an integral part of the operating system. It also gets the much
bally-hooed "Full Stealth" security test re[port same as ZA, Kerio, Sygate
or any of the others.

If you want an effective firewall that never bugs you and is effective use
the one you already have. Evidently Microsoft does not feel outbound
"protection" is really any kind of protection at all.

Don't fall into the security geeknoid syndrome as so many do....USE your
computer for what you intend...don't get sidelined, beleaguered, and annoyed
by "security applications" trying to "keep you safe".

--

Charlie in Mississippi
(driftin' blues player and gospel picker)




"Bruce Chambers" wrote in message
...
Greetings --

WinXP's built-in firewall is fine at stopping incoming attacks, and
hiding 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, Kerio, or Sygate are all much better, and are much more
easily configured, and there are a free versions of each readily
available. Even Symantec's Norton Personal Firewall is superior,
although it does take a heavier toll of performance then do ZoneAlarm,
Kerio, or Sygate.


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


wrote in message
...
How does the built-in firewall in XP compare with Zone Alarm?

It doesn't!

wrote in message
...
How does the built-in firewall in XP compare with Zone Alarm?

Greetings --

Does it hurt to be so completely clueless? If there were any
justice in the world, it certainly would. Please stick to your
"gospel pinking" (is that a fruit or a vegetable, btw?) and leave
computer/technical/security issues to those of us who deal with such
things on a daily basis, on a professional level.

My point is that WinXP's built-in firewall is most definitely
_not_ an effective tool. It does provide some simple, rudimentary
protect from malicious attacks, but does absolutely nothing to protect
the uninformed user from himself. Nor is it readily configurable, for
those people who used advanced or specialized applications that need
to access other computers via non-standard ports.


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


"Charlie" wrote in message
...
The WinXP firewall is in unobtrusive firewall that works and never
bugs the
user with so-called "attack" alerts, a barrage of outbound
permission
requests mostly from cryptically named dll's etc no one knows how to
respond
to and it consumes no resources nor requires any installation as it
is
already an integral part of the operating system. It also gets the
much
bally-hooed "Full Stealth" security test re[port same as ZA, Kerio,
Sygate
or any of the others.

If you want an effective firewall that never bugs you and is
effective use
the one you already have. Evidently Microsoft does not feel outbound
"protection" is really any kind of protection at all.

Don't fall into the security geeknoid syndrome as so many do....USE
your
computer for what you intend...don't get sidelined, beleaguered, and
annoyed
by "security applications" trying to "keep you safe".

--

Charlie in Mississippi
(driftin' blues player and gospel picker)