Firewall redundancy

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

I already have Zone Alarm on both lap top and desktop. I recently
installed a Linksys wireless system. I did NOT put in the firewall
program that came with the Linksys. Any particular reason that I
should?

--------------------------------------------------------
"Writers even write the silences"
-J. Michael Straczynski

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Kurt Ullman wrote:

> I already have Zone Alarm on both lap top and desktop. I recently
> installed a Linksys wireless system. I did NOT put in the firewall
> program that came with the Linksys. Any particular reason that I
> should?

AFAIK a 60-day version of Norton Internet Security is included with Linksys
routers. Here are the main points why you do NOT need to install it:

- updates will run for 2 months only, later you'll have to pay them
- you may have problems with two firewalls running
- there is not need for two firewalls
- with a router connecting you to the internet most attacks are already
blocked. An attacker can see the router only, not your PC. But the firewall
will prevent trojan horses and spyware to send inforamtion to the internet.

Thomas

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

In article <cnaf4d$n7b$03$1@news.t-online.com>, Thomas
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Kr=FCger?= <newsgroups@nospam.nowire.org> wrote:
>Kurt Ullman wrote:
>
>> I already have Zone Alarm on both lap top and desktop. I recently
>> installed a Linksys wireless system. I did NOT put in the firewall
>> program that came with the Linksys. Any particular reason that I
>> should?
>
>AFAIK a 60-day version of Norton Internet Security is included with Linksys
>routers. Here are the main points why you do NOT need to install it:
>
>- updates will run for 2 months only, later you'll have to pay them
>- you may have problems with two firewalls running
>- there is not need for two firewalls
>- with a router connecting you to the internet most attacks are already
>blocked. An attacker can see the router only, not your PC. But the firewall
>will prevent trojan horses and spyware to send inforamtion to the internet.
>
That is what I figured, but there is a part of me that thinks if
one is good, two HAS to be twice as good. Thanks for setting me
straight (g).

--------------------------------------------------------
"Writers even write the silences"
-J. Michael Straczynski

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.internet.wireless (More info?)

Taking a moment's reflection, Kurt Ullman mused:
|
| That is what I figured, but there is a part of me that thinks if
| one is good, two HAS to be twice as good.

Best case scenario, one blocks the traffic before the other one even
sees it. Worst case scenario, both fight for access to the packets causing
all kinds of issues including allowing malicious code through to your
computer. In this case, less is more.