Best Firewall software - Outpost or Zonealarm

Or any other indeed

Zonealarm is the popular choice , read in 1 magazine only - about it
using up bandwidth but nowhere else

Outpost has a very different interface

Any expert opinions ?

thanks

Sygate home network... I've got a full version on CD if you'd like a copy

~Topaz~

zero <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Or any other indeed
>
> Zonealarm is the popular choice , read in 1 magazine only - about it
> using up bandwidth but nowhere else
>
> Outpost has a very different interface
>
> Any expert opinions ?
>
> thanks
>
>
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.588 / Virus Database: 372 - Release Date: 13/02/04

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 20:47:43 -0000, "zero" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Or any other indeed
>
>Zonealarm is the popular choice , read in 1 magazine only - about it
>using up bandwidth but nowhere else

I use Za and don't notice it using any bandwidth at all.

I also use Blackice defender, also a nice product. For yet another box
I have Kerio, which is again acceptable.

Mark McIntyre wrote:
> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 20:47:43 -0000, "zero" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Or any other indeed
>>
>>Zonealarm is the popular choice , read in 1 magazine only - about it
>>using up bandwidth but nowhere else
>
>
> I use Za and don't notice it using any bandwidth at all.
>
> I also use Blackice defender, also a nice product. For yet another box
> I have Kerio, which is again acceptable.

Not bandwidth, latency..

When I used to use it, I could seen Zone Alarms affect on ping tests,
that was enough for me to switch to another product... Kerio worked
well for me, until I went to broadband, and now I am behind a NAT, so no
firewall is needed (I am careful what I run...)

> >Zonealarm is the popular choice , read in 1 magazine only - about it
> >using up bandwidth but nowhere else
> I use Za and don't notice it using any bandwidth at all.

Never known ZA to use bandwidth or restrict traffic on any of the
numerous systems i`ve built / repaired / configured for people (mainly
using win98se)

> I also use Blackice defender, also a nice product.

Blackice was only ever touted as an intrusion detector IIRC not a
firewall. It also (which might be fixed now) managed to miss several of
the most common trojans (www.grc.com listed them at one point IIRC)

> For yet another box I have Kerio, which is again acceptable.

No experience of Kerio, so can`t comment :-p

--
Please add "[newsgroup]" in the subject of any personal replies via email
* old email address "btiruseless" abandoned due to worm-generated spam *
--- My new email address has "ngspamtrap" & @btinternet.com in it ;-) ---

On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 23:39:23 -0000, Colin Wilson <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

(I said)
>> I also use Blackice defender, also a nice product.
>
>Blackice was only ever touted as an intrusion detector IIRC not a
>firewall. It also (which might be fixed now) managed to miss several of
>the most common trojans (www.grc.com listed them at one point IIRC)

It seems that all these have been fixed.

In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, zero
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Or any other indeed
>
>Zonealarm is the popular choice , read in 1 magazine only - about it
>using up bandwidth but nowhere else
>
>Outpost has a very different interface
>
>Any expert opinions ?

ZA is somewhat greedy on resources. Outpost is winning many accolades
and is arguably currently has the best security and features.

Outpost is certainly good though I found it a little "fussy" in
operation and went back to Kerio Personal Firewall which I'm a little
more used to. Also, if it's just for personal use, the full version of
KPF can be installed as, after 30 days, it disables a couple of features
(web blocking which I found too agressive anyway and don't need, and the
ability to act as a gateway firewall when using internet connection
sharing).

--
Julian Knight,
Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Security, Directory, Messaging, Network & PC Consultant
http://www.knightnet.org.uk/

In message <YbTXb.5400$Y%(E-Mail Removed)>, Zapp Brannigan
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Mark McIntyre wrote:
>> On Sun, 15 Feb 2004 20:47:43 -0000, "zero" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>Or any other indeed
>>>
>>>Zonealarm is the popular choice , read in 1 magazine only - about it
>>>using up bandwidth but nowhere else
>> I use Za and don't notice it using any bandwidth at all. I also
>>use Blackice defender, also a nice product. For yet another box
>> I have Kerio, which is again acceptable.
>
>Not bandwidth, latency..
>
>When I used to use it, I could seen Zone Alarms affect on ping tests,
>that was enough for me to switch to another product... Kerio worked
>well for me, until I went to broadband, and now I am behind a NAT, so
>no firewall is needed (I am careful what I run...)

Sorry to disagree Mark, but you DO still need a personal firewall. There
are just too many ways to be infected by malware now to rely just on a
network firewall and anti-virus tool. Personal firewalls are highly
effective at spotting and crippling trojans and other spyware allowing
you to get rid of them before they cause damage to you and others.

--
Julian Knight,
Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Security, Directory, Messaging, Network & PC Consultant
http://www.knightnet.org.uk/

In message <(E-Mail Removed)> , Colin
Wilson <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>> >Zonealarm is the popular choice , read in 1 magazine only - about it
>> >using up bandwidth but nowhere else
>> I use Za and don't notice it using any bandwidth at all.
>
>Never known ZA to use bandwidth or restrict traffic on any of the
>numerous systems i`ve built / repaired / configured for people (mainly
>using win98se)
>
>> I also use Blackice defender, also a nice product.
>
>Blackice was only ever touted as an intrusion detector IIRC not a
>firewall. It also (which might be fixed now) managed to miss several of
>the most common trojans (www.grc.com listed them at one point IIRC)
>
Yep, not recommended.

>> For yet another box I have Kerio, which is again acceptable.
>
>No experience of Kerio, so can`t comment :-p
>
It's good. It runs (even the free version) as a service under NT/2k/XP
as well which makes it more secure.

--
Julian Knight,
Sheffield, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Security, Directory, Messaging, Network & PC Consultant
http://www.knightnet.org.uk/