| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Curious
Guest IP: 71.48.*.*
|
Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:03 pm Post subject: Are AV firewalls worth the price/subscription cost |
|
|
Are AV firewalls worth the price/subscription cost?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Cudni
Special Response Team
 Joined: Dec 10, 2002 Posts: 3718 Location: Et In Arcadia ego
|
Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would say they are worth it but if money is an issue there are good free AV and FW
Cudni _________________ Hecho en Mexico
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TestMan
Captain

Joined: Aug 24, 2004 Posts: 361 Location: USA
|
Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For me personally...No.
It all depends on what you want from a firewall.The "Pro" version of Zone Alarm has extra features.For a surfer that wants those extras from ZA it may be worth it.
I look for basic protection and stealth rating at grc.com.
Some of the free firewalls achieve that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
herbalist
Lieutenant

 Joined: May 01, 2005 Posts: 180 Location: Northern Michigan, USA
|
Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 4:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Are AV firewalls worth the price/subscription cost? |
That depends. If you're comfortable with choosing components for your own security package and writing rules for your own firewall, you can assemble your own security package that's every bit as strong as the best security suites, if not better, and do so at little or no cost. There is even a free Host Intrusion Protection System (HIPS) for those who are knowlegable and comfortable with configuring application rulesets.
Regarding the AV component, there are some good free ones. While different "tests" claim that one detects more than another or is updated faster or more often, this is much more variable than the testing would indicate. The results vary greatly depending on who is choosing the test material. I've used strictly freeware AVs for the last 4 years and have remained uninfected. A well configured HIPS will also intercept much of the malicious code and does greatly reduce the threat posed by new or undetected malicious code. While I don't recommend it for any but the most experienced users who can determine what is and is not malicious, I'm becoming convinved that a well configured HIPS can eliminate the need for a resident AV, but not for AV scanners.
The subscription system used by some vendors may be worthwhile for those that don't want or can't afford to spend a significant portion of their time keeping up with security threats and studying the details of security system configuration. Depending on how far you go with it, assembling and maintaining your own security system can be quite time consuming, especially with HIPS software which does require the user to learn his operating system and installed software in depth.
The deciding factors are:
1, your level of skill and knowlege of your system.
2, the amount of time your willing to spend on security.
Learning rule based security software, whether it's a firewall or a full fledged HIPS does take a substantial amount of time, both in the configuring and in the learning of the details of how and why it works. How valuable is your time? Are you just security conscious or closer to paranoid about your security/privacy? Your answer to these questions will decide what's right for you.
Rick
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TestMan
Captain

Joined: Aug 24, 2004 Posts: 361 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you are looking at AV programs....
The AV that I rely on is a paid/subscription program.Basicly, because it has heuristics and it's a very configurable program.In that aspect,I prefer subscription programs over free.
Herbalist brought up some excellent points...I will take the time to tweak an AV,but not a firewall.I don't care to set rules in a rule-based firewall.
Depending on your surfing habits you can easily get by with freeware.Even the least of the freeware AV's would probably do the job.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
jisern Warnings : 1 Cadet

 Joined: Aug 02, 2006 Posts: 4 Location: USA
|
Posted: Wed Aug 02, 2006 4:51 am Post subject: Re: Are AV firewalls worth the price/subscription cost |
|
|
If your using WinXP the firewall built in is good enough unless you have some specific needs or something highly customized.
-Jake Isern
| Curious wrote: | | Are AV firewalls worth the price/subscription cost? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ups4
Sergeant

 Joined: Sep 12, 2004 Posts: 82 Location: Sunrise, FL
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 2:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Has Windows firewall started blocking outbound threats?
If not, I would suggest another software firewall.
IF you were to get a trojan, what would stop it from sending data out?
Paul _________________ ...my get-up-and-go musta got up and went...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
OldRebel
Captain

 Joined: Jan 12, 2006 Posts: 433
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No, of course not. The Windows firewall will NOT block outbound threats. If you install Windows Live One Care, however, it modifies the native firewall by Group Policy and creates a firewall that does have outbound blocking capabilities. It seemed to me that is was equivalent to something like the McAfee firewall. However, neither McAfee, One Care, or Zone Alarm free do very well on firewall leak tests. _________________ OldRebel
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
OldRebel
Captain

 Joined: Jan 12, 2006 Posts: 433
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I cannot find an "edit" button! I meant to say that they do NOT do well on leak tests! _________________ OldRebel
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
duke1959
Sergeant

 Joined: Jul 22, 2006 Posts: 122 Location: USA
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hello OldRebel, and ups4. I read where starting with Zone Alarm Free 6.1.744 which wasn't used on firewallleaktest, that this version passed a few more including PC Audit. I was going to try this version since it is said to be more stable than newest versions. My question is. If this is correct, does it then warrant using ZA Free in place of Windows XP Firewall? I have tried, and liked Kerio 4.2.2 because of the Application Behavior Blocking, which helped it to pass a few more tests than ZA Free. Unfortunately, since I share the CPU with my wife, I'm afraid that particular feature wouldn't be a good idea in the long run. Will await both of your responses, and thanks ahead of time.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
OldRebel
Captain

 Joined: Jan 12, 2006 Posts: 433
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't have any personal experience with Zone Alarm Free, but unless it has a specific software conflict with something else on your PC, it is bound to be better than the Windows firewall. Anything (except something with an exploited vulnerability) is better than the Windows firewall, AFAIK. _________________ OldRebel
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ups4
Sergeant

 Joined: Sep 12, 2004 Posts: 82 Location: Sunrise, FL
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If you're behind a NATed router, ZA free will do fine for your needs.
However, just disable Windows firewall (or any others) when using ZA.
Most firewalls don't play nice together. Besides, you really only need one in this case.
Paul _________________ ...my get-up-and-go musta got up and went...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
duke1959
Sergeant

 Joined: Jul 22, 2006 Posts: 122 Location: USA
|
Posted: Thu Aug 03, 2006 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Okay thanks. I currently am not using a Router Firewall. That's why I thought it better to use something with outbound protection. As I said Kerio provided this, but I was thinking ZA Free would be simpler in my particular case with my wife also using the CPU.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Jeruvy
Lieutenant
 Premium Member
Joined: Jan 01, 2004 Posts: 165
|
Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2006 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I would disagree with one comment, that firewalls don't play nice together.
This should be qualified to state 'poorly written' firewalls don't play nice together, like ZoneAlarm or Kerio.
The latter is a decent stateless filter, with a bit of overhead on the usage but ZoneAlarm is far too basic to allow granular settings.
Install either of these however with something like Windows Firewall and expect problems that don't make sense.
If the choice came to the three, I'd stick with windows firewall since performance and 'settings' are both good and simple compared to the other two. ZA is too dumb, and Kerio is too smart. I like a balanced middleground. Something I can use and my children without making a 'oops was I supposed to block that' from happening.
So, ultimately I'd not use any of the above. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
farmerlee
Cadet

 Joined: Aug 12, 2006 Posts: 6 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think many of the paid for products are worth the money. I have used many freeware versions in the past and had no problems but i find paid for software seems to give me better peace of mind. Currently i have paid for nod32, outpost pro 3.5 and webroot spysweeper.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|