Which Firewall is Best?

Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

I have been doing some research on several firewalls and have found
conflicting reviews on which is best. Here is a short list of what I
have found so far:

1. Sygate Pro
2. BlackICE
3. Outpost Pro
4. BitDefender Pro
5. PC-Cillin Internet Security 2004

I am wanting to make the move away from Symantec, but would like some
user experiences on the products before I purchase.

Thanks in advance!!!
20 answers Last reply
More about which firewall best
  1. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    "Robert Smith" <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote in
    news:mYzNc.158026$wH4.8841876@twister.southeast.rr.com:

    > I have been doing some research on several firewalls and have found
    > conflicting reviews on which is best. Here is a short list of what I
    > have found so far:
    >
    > 1. Sygate Pro
    > 2. BlackICE
    > 3. Outpost Pro
    > 4. BitDefender Pro
    > 5. PC-Cillin Internet Security 2004
    >
    > I am wanting to make the move away from Symantec, but would like some
    > user experiences on the products before I purchase.
    >

    No one can make your decision but you. Try them all and find the one that
    best meets your needs. They all have trial software.

    Duane :)
  2. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:39:30 GMT, "Robert Smith"
    <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote:

    >I have been doing some research on several firewalls and have found
    >conflicting reviews on which is best. Here is a short list of what I
    >have found so far:
    >
    >1. Sygate Pro
    >2. BlackICE
    >3. Outpost Pro
    >4. BitDefender Pro
    >5. PC-Cillin Internet Security 2004
    >
    >I am wanting to make the move away from Symantec, but would like some
    >user experiences on the products before I purchase.
    >
    >Thanks in advance!!!

    None of those...

    ZoneAlarm (Pro) or Kerio..
  3. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    >
    > None of those...
    >
    > ZoneAlarm (Pro) or Kerio..

    Earthling,

    Thanks for the reply - never tried Kerio, but I have ZAPro and had some
    problems with certain websites when using it... I believe it was
    either JAVA or ActiveX problems - can't recall...

    --

    ~~~~~~~~~
    Robert Smith
  4. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    Robert Smith wrote:

    > I have been doing some research on several firewalls and have found
    > conflicting reviews on which is best. Here is a short list of what I
    > have found so far:
    >
    > 1. Sygate Pro
    > 2. BlackICE
    > 3. Outpost Pro
    > 4. BitDefender Pro
    > 5. PC-Cillin Internet Security 2004
    >
    > I am wanting to make the move away from Symantec, but would like some
    > user experiences on the products before I purchase.
    >
    > Thanks in advance!!!

    Just noticed that this post is not showing up on deja... I'm going to
    repost in case noone can see this but rr.com users...

    --

    ~~~~~~~~~
    Robert Smith
  5. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    In article <FmBNc.219701$2o2.10938930@twister.southeast.rr.com>, rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com
    says...
    > >
    > > None of those...
    > >
    > > ZoneAlarm (Pro) or Kerio..
    >
    > Earthling,
    >
    > Thanks for the reply - never tried Kerio, but I have ZAPro and had some
    > problems with certain websites when using it... I believe it was
    > either JAVA or ActiveX problems - can't recall...
    >
    >
    Before you buy, you might want to try some of the free versions
    to see which one "fits".
    Sygate free is at:
    http://soho.sygate.com/free/default.php
  6. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    Buy yourself a sleek RP614 router. There inexpensive and an effective
    firewall.


    "Robert Smith" <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote in message
    news:puBNc.219704$2o2.10938930@twister.southeast.rr.com...
    > Robert Smith wrote:
    >
    > > I have been doing some research on several firewalls and have found
    > > conflicting reviews on which is best. Here is a short list of what I
    > > have found so far:
    > >
    > > 1. Sygate Pro
    > > 2. BlackICE
    > > 3. Outpost Pro
    > > 4. BitDefender Pro
    > > 5. PC-Cillin Internet Security 2004
    > >
    > > I am wanting to make the move away from Symantec, but would like some
    > > user experiences on the products before I purchase.
    > >
    > > Thanks in advance!!!
    >
    > Just noticed that this post is not showing up on deja... I'm going to
    > repost in case noone can see this but rr.com users...
    >
    > --
    >
    > ~~~~~~~~~
    > Robert Smith
  7. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    In article <k5KNc.501$09.98034@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
    ktwonnj@NOSPAMoptonline.net says...
    > Buy yourself a sleek RP614 router. There inexpensive and an effective
    > firewall.

    The RP614 is a router with NAT, not a firewall. It is a nice first line
    of defense for home users.

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  8. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    7/28/2004 8:33:12 AM

    Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message

    <MPG.1b71675daad85e6a98a7f7@news-server.columbus.rr.com>


    > In article <k5KNc.501$09.98034@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,

    > ktwonnj@NOSPAMoptonline.net says...

    > > Buy yourself a sleek RP614 router. There inexpensive and an
    effective

    > > firewall.

    >

    > The RP614 is a router with NAT, not a firewall. It is a nice first
    line

    > of defense for home users.

    >

    > --

    > --

    > spamfree999@rrohio.com

    > (Remove 999 to reply to me)


    Just checked NetGear's site - I think I may try the FR114P (which has
    both NAT and SPI firewall...)

    Thanks for the advice!!!
  9. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    In article <JzNNc.181526$tH1.7767975@twister.southeast.rr.com>,
    rsmith.remove@triad.rr.remove.com says...
    > Just checked NetGear's site - I think I may try the FR114P (which has
    > both NAT and SPI firewall...)
    >
    > Thanks for the advice!!!

    Just keep in mind one thing - neither NAT or SPI make the device a
    firewall. SPI ensures that the traffic that is permitted in is the
    correct traffic. NAT and SPI are parts of many firewalls, but they do
    not make the device a firewall.

    Isn't it wonderful what Marketing types and Sales people can do when
    they start playing with words to describe a product :)

    Now, for the real info - if you get a router with NAT/SPI, it's a very
    nice start, in the old days I used NAT as a border defense method and
    additional protections inside the network, even with public facing
    services. During that time I ever found an uninvited quest connected to
    our systems, but, that was before people really started attacking the
    "routers". If you are going to get something with SPI, consider a
    Linksys, so that you can download the free WallWatcher software to track
    ALL in/out bound traffic - this will let you monitor what stations
    INSIDE your network are communicating with OUTSIDE resources, and it
    will also show you what outside resources are making connection
    attempts. It's a dang nice application - about a year ago he sent me the
    source code for it and I modified it to log all the traffic to a SQL
    server for reporting, dang nice chap.

    I don't know if the Netgear works with WallWatcher, but Linksys was a
    number of "Firewall" named units (which are NAT/SPI) that you could pick
    from.

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  10. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    7/28/2004 10:05:40 AM

    Leythos <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message

    <MPG.1b717e2a7dd19a298a7f8@news-server.columbus.rr.com>


    > In article <JzNNc.181526$tH1.7767975@twister.southeast.rr.com>,

    > rsmith.remove@triad.rr.remove.com says...

    > > Just checked NetGear's site - I think I may try the FR114P (which
    has

    > > both NAT and SPI firewall...)

    > >

    > > Thanks for the advice!!!

    >

    > Just keep in mind one thing - neither NAT or SPI make the device a

    > firewall. SPI ensures that the traffic that is permitted in is the

    > correct traffic. NAT and SPI are parts of many firewalls, but they
    do

    > not make the device a firewall.

    >

    > Isn't it wonderful what Marketing types and Sales people can do
    when

    > they start playing with words to describe a product :)

    >

    > Now, for the real info - if you get a router with NAT/SPI, it's a
    very

    > nice start, in the old days I used NAT as a border defense method
    and

    > additional protections inside the network, even with public facing

    > services. During that time I ever found an uninvited quest
    connected to

    > our systems, but, that was before people really started attacking
    the

    > "routers". If you are going to get something with SPI, consider a

    > Linksys, so that you can download the free WallWatcher software to
    track

    > ALL in/out bound traffic - this will let you monitor what stations

    > INSIDE your network are communicating with OUTSIDE resources, and
    it

    > will also show you what outside resources are making connection

    > attempts. It's a dang nice application - about a year ago he sent
    me the

    > source code for it and I modified it to log all the traffic to a
    SQL

    > server for reporting, dang nice chap.

    >

    > I don't know if the Netgear works with WallWatcher, but Linksys was
    a

    > number of "Firewall" named units (which are NAT/SPI) that you could
    pick

    > from.

    >

    > --

    > --

    > spamfree999@rrohio.com

    > (Remove 999 to reply to me)


    Leythos,

    Thanks for the advice! That's very useful and I'll check out
    LinkSys' products as well!
  11. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    >
    > I don't know if the Netgear works with WallWatcher, but Linksys was a
    > number of "Firewall" named units (which are NAT/SPI) that you could
    > pick from.

    Just thought I would let you know that the FR114P is at the top of the
    WallWatcher Website as being supported (looks like the ONLY NetGear
    supported, btw...)

    --

    ~~~~~~~~~
    Robert Smith
  12. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    The RP614 is a firewall. Maybe not your definition of a firewall.


    "Leythos" <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message
    news:MPG.1b71675daad85e6a98a7f7@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > In article <k5KNc.501$09.98034@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
    > ktwonnj@NOSPAMoptonline.net says...
    > > Buy yourself a sleek RP614 router. There inexpensive and an effective
    > > firewall.
    >
    > The RP614 is a router with NAT, not a firewall. It is a nice first line
    > of defense for home users.
    >
    > --
    > --
    > spamfree999@rrohio.com
    > (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  13. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    In article <AHVNc.15311$09.2065528@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
    ktwonnj@NOSPAMoptonline.net says...
    > The RP614 is a firewall. Maybe not your definition of a firewall.

    And since I design secure networks, manage secure networks, etc... all
    over the country I would say that my definition carries some weight with
    all of our virus free, uncompromised, protected clients. How many
    RP614's have you seen protecting businesses where they can state they've
    never been compromised? How many home users can state that they've never
    been compromised while using the RP614 (I know about 30 that have been
    compromised while using one - even with no port forwarding).

    What are you saying, are you one of those marketers that claims anything
    that blocks anything for any reason is a fully functional firewall?

    How about bottom posting too.

    > "Leythos" <void@nowhere.com> wrote in message
    > news:MPG.1b71675daad85e6a98a7f7@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
    > > In article <k5KNc.501$09.98034@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>,
    > > ktwonnj@NOSPAMoptonline.net says...
    > > > Buy yourself a sleek RP614 router. There inexpensive and an effective
    > > > firewall.
    > >
    > > The RP614 is a router with NAT, not a firewall. It is a nice first line
    > > of defense for home users.
    > >
    > > --
    > > --
    > > spamfree999@rrohio.com
    > > (Remove 999 to reply to me)
    >
    >
    >

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  14. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    "K2NNJ" <ktwonnj@NOSPAMoptonline.net> wrote in news:AHVNc.15311
    $09.2065528@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net:

    > The RP614 is a firewall. Maybe not your definition of a firewall.
    >
    >

    One can call it what one wants. The RP614 cannot be called a true FW
    appliance. It's a simple as that. It doesn't meet the specs. It has FW
    like capabilities and nothing more. It doesn't take a rocket scientists
    to figure it out.

    If the RP614 can meet the specs in the link below, then it is a FW
    appliance. The RP614 cannot meet the specs.

    http://www.firewall-software.com/firewall_faqs/what_does_firewall_do.html

    No NAT router for home usage such as a RP614 is a FW appliance. It's
    plain and simple.

    Duane :)
  15. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    "Robert Smith" <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote in message news:<shSNc.158145$wH4.8945113@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
    ....
    > Just thought I would let you know that the FR114P is at the top of the
    > WallWatcher Website as being supported (looks like the ONLY NetGear
    > supported, btw...)

    WallWatcher can be changed to add support for other Routers. The main
    requirement is that the Routers must send real-time log records to
    SysLog port 514 or SNMPTrap port 162. For more information, go to the
    WallWatcher website (www.wallwatcher.com) and find the section on
    "Adding support for other Routers."
  16. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    7/29/2004 2:11:32 PM

    Dan Tseng - WallWatcher author <newsgroups@wallwatcher.com> wrote in
    message

    <bfb8d66c.0407291011.3909faee@posting.google.com>


    > "Robert Smith" <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote in message
    news:<shSNc.158145$wH4.8945113@twister.southeast.rr.com>...

    > ..

    > > Just thought I would let you know that the FR114P is at the top
    of the

    > > WallWatcher Website as being supported (looks like the ONLY
    NetGear

    > > supported, btw...)

    >

    > WallWatcher can be changed to add support for other Routers. The
    main

    > requirement is that the Routers must send real-time log records to

    > SysLog port 514 or SNMPTrap port 162. For more information, go to
    the

    > WallWatcher website (www.wallwatcher.com) and find the section on

    > "Adding support for other Routers."


    Thanks Dan! Just wondering if you happen to know if the NetGear
    FVS318 does this or not. I can't seem to find any information on it
    on their website...

    Thanks!
  17. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    In article <bfb8d66c.0407291011.3909faee@posting.google.com>,
    newsgroups@wallwatcher.com says...
    > "Robert Smith" <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote in message news:<shSNc.158145$wH4.8945113@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
    > ...
    > > Just thought I would let you know that the FR114P is at the top of the
    > > WallWatcher Website as being supported (looks like the ONLY NetGear
    > > supported, btw...)
    >
    > WallWatcher can be changed to add support for other Routers. The main
    > requirement is that the Routers must send real-time log records to
    > SysLog port 514 or SNMPTrap port 162. For more information, go to the
    > WallWatcher website (www.wallwatcher.com) and find the section on
    > "Adding support for other Routers."

    Dan - you are my hero. Back when I wanted to use WW (several years ago)
    with my BEFSR41 you sent me the code so that I could change it to log to
    my SQL server. You are a great person!

    Thanks for making such a great product!

    --
    --
    spamfree999@rrohio.com
    (Remove 999 to reply to me)
  18. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    On 29 Jul 2004 11:11:32 -0700, newsgroups@wallwatcher.com (Dan Tseng -
    WallWatcher author) wrote:

    >"Robert Smith" <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote in message news:<shSNc.158145$wH4.8945113@twister.southeast.rr.com>...
    >...
    >> Just thought I would let you know that the FR114P is at the top of the
    >> WallWatcher Website as being supported (looks like the ONLY NetGear
    >> supported, btw...)
    >
    >WallWatcher can be changed to add support for other Routers. The main
    >requirement is that the Routers must send real-time log records to
    >SysLog port 514 or SNMPTrap port 162. For more information, go to the
    >WallWatcher website (www.wallwatcher.com) and find the section on
    >"Adding support for other Routers."

    Thanks for posting Dan,

    Nice product, I knocked up some perl about 12 months ago to convert OpenBSD
    PF

    http://www.openbsd.org/faq/pf/index.html

    logging into a pseudo linksys form which could be digested by it.

    Seeing, that you're taking requests so to speak LOL.

    If you're interested I can collect and send on some PF logs from OpenBSD
    and the FreeBSD port of PF within the next day or so.


    Greg


    --
    Konnt ihr mich horen?
    Konnt ihr mich sehen?
    Konnt ihr mich fuhlen?
    Ich versteh euch nicht
  19. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    "Earthling" <frank66@luukkku.com> wrote in message
    news:s8ndg01m48qd32bg8cpedu0rv801l2q75s@4ax.com...
    > On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:39:30 GMT, "Robert Smith"
    > <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote:
    >
    > >I have been doing some research on several firewalls and have found
    > >conflicting reviews on which is best. Here is a short list of what I
    > >have found so far:
    > >
    > >1. Sygate Pro
    > >2. BlackICE
    > >3. Outpost Pro
    > >4. BitDefender Pro
    > >5. PC-Cillin Internet Security 2004
    > >
    > >I am wanting to make the move away from Symantec, but would like some
    > >user experiences on the products before I purchase.
    > >
    > >Thanks in advance!!!
    >
    > None of those...
    >
    > ZoneAlarm (Pro) or Kerio..

    Why especialy those two? Whats wrong with Sygagte and Outpost?
  20. Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (More info?)

    "beatnik" <beatnik@mail.gr> wrote in news:ceg029$ot2$1@nic.grnet.gr:

    >
    > "Earthling" <frank66@luukkku.com> wrote in message
    > news:s8ndg01m48qd32bg8cpedu0rv801l2q75s@4ax.com...
    >> On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 21:39:30 GMT, "Robert Smith"
    >> <rsmith.remove@triad.remove.rr.com> wrote:
    >>
    >> >I have been doing some research on several firewalls and have found
    >> >conflicting reviews on which is best. Here is a short list of what I
    >> >have found so far:
    >> >
    >> >1. Sygate Pro
    >> >2. BlackICE
    >> >3. Outpost Pro
    >> >4. BitDefender Pro
    >> >5. PC-Cillin Internet Security 2004
    >> >
    >> >I am wanting to make the move away from Symantec, but would like some
    >> >user experiences on the products before I purchase.
    >> >
    >> >Thanks in advance!!!
    >>
    >> None of those...
    >>
    >> ZoneAlarm (Pro) or Kerio..
    >
    > Why especialy those two? Whats wrong with Sygagte and Outpost?
    >
    >
    >

    Opinions are a dime a dozen and everyone has one.

    Duane :)
Ask a new question

Read More

Firewalls Security Internet Security Networking