Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

zonealarm 6 good news?

Last response: in Networking
Share
August 12, 2005 8:35:57 PM

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

Hi

I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?

More about : zonealarm good news

Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 12, 2005 8:35:58 PM

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

I have been running Zone Alarm Pro V6 for about 2+ weeks now with zero
problems. I also enabled their free version of a anti-spyware. Running
Windows XP with current SP2 updates.

------------------------
"JIP" <JIP@thatplace.com> wrote in message
news:42fcc1df$0$97140$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net...
> Hi
>
> I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
> far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?
>
August 12, 2005 9:20:21 PM

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

JIP said ...
> Hi
>
> I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
> far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?
>
>
>
I've had no problem using ZA6 free version.
--
Sam
Related resources
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 13, 2005 12:00:40 AM

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

In article <42fcc1df$0$97140$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>,
JIP@thatplace.com says...
> Hi
>
> I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
> far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?

So far I have only heard good news regarding ZA Pro 6, however, I have
seen some weird reports on the free ZA 6. I have installed ZA Pro 6
here and tried it out for a few days with no troubles. Also installed
the Free ZA on another machine with no problems so far either.

Another great place to read and post questions is here:

http://wilderssecurity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=31



--
Kerodo
August 13, 2005 1:43:47 AM

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

"JIP" <JIP@thatplace.com> wrote...

> Hi
>
> I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
> far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?

So far, so good, after an initial mess with Zone Alarm Pro. From what I
read on the Zone Alarm Forum, choose a Clean Install rather than an Update
to avoid most problems with the new v6.

Craig
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 13, 2005 6:10:29 PM

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

JIP wrote:
> Hi
>
> I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
> far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?
>
>

I did have problems, but in the last hour I did a clean install of
version 6 and it seems to be working fine now. It's the first time I've
installed the .3 minor update to version 6. Maybe that has something do
to with it?

--
Wattsville Blues
http://wattsvilleblues.blogspot.com/
There is no catharsis
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 14, 2005 2:32:33 AM

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

In Message-ID:<42fcc1df$0$97140$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader03.plus.net>
posted on Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:35:57 +0100, JIP wrote: Begin

>Hi
>
>I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
>far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?
>

I decided to evaluate it against my eTrust EZ Firewall and it's very
similar. It has several features I'm not interested in such as email
attachment scanning, virus scanning, and anti-spy/spam filtration, but
the basic action is as good as eTrust (re-branded ZA) however you can't
change the skin color if that's important.
My Conclusion is it's not worth any extra expense to change if you
already have eTrust, or even a previous later version of ZA, but it's
certainly adequate for someone in the market for a first firewall, or as
a replacement for the XP firewall illusion, plus it has the
(questionable) advantage of viral and spybot scanning too.

FWIW: I'm referring to ZAP v6.0.631.003 full licensed version
tested on Win98SE w/aDSL connection.
note* The antivirus, email, and spyware features weren't evaluated.

--

Bart
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 14, 2005 2:36:28 AM

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

In Message-ID:<nK8Le.92346$5N3.4786@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
posted on Fri, 12 Aug 2005 21:43:47 GMT, Craig wrote: Begin

>
>"JIP" <JIP@thatplace.com> wrote...
>
>> Hi
>>
>> I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
>> far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?
>
> So far, so good, after an initial mess with Zone Alarm Pro. From what I
>read on the Zone Alarm Forum, choose a Clean Install rather than an Update
>to avoid most problems with the new v6.
>
>Craig
>

I too did a "clean" install.
I had the eTrust EZ Firewall (re-branded ZA) that used some ZA files in
the system folder and references in the registry, and I purged them all
before install.

--

Bart
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 16, 2005 8:02:27 PM

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

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:35:57 +0100, "JIP" <JIP@thatplace.com> wrote:

>Hi
>
>I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
>far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?
>
I'm using the free version, and the only problem I am having is that
the Pass-Lock function does not seem to be available, let alone
working. Other than that - fine.

-
Glen

Ottawa

(Remove the ".NIT.invalid" from the end of my address)
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 17, 2005 12:35:06 AM

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

In Message-ID:<ufh4g11j6ijqneu6abpq4gb91rgqs23tgp@4ax.com> posted on
Tue, 16 Aug 2005 16:02:27 -0400, Glen McLean wrote: Begin

>On Fri, 12 Aug 2005 16:35:57 +0100, "JIP" <JIP@thatplace.com> wrote:
>
>>Hi
>>
>>I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
>>far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?
>>
>I'm using the free version, and the only problem I am having is that
>the Pass-Lock function does not seem to be available, let alone
>working. Other than that - fine.
>
>-
>Glen
>
>Ottawa
>
>(Remove the ".NIT.invalid" from the end of my address)

I ended up reverting to my ZA v4.5 after a couple days with v6.
The new version lacks some of the conveniences of the old;
like opening to the last page (alerts) or automatically entering the new
IP from a dynamically assigned aDSL service into an active network.

--

Bart
August 23, 2005 1:04:20 PM

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

JIP wrote:
> Hi
>
> I came here to see what the feedback was on ZA 6 before installing it. So
> far it all looks bad news. Is there nay good news?
>
>
> I am using Z.A 6 no problems at all just have to configer it a bit
more thn V 5
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 24, 2005 6:31:34 PM

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

Don't try it yet unless you can do it on a throwaway partition. It really
wrecked my test partition -- I had to delete the partition and start over.
Locks up, even after uninstall and reinstall of 5.5. Good old 5.5.


--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
spam@uce.gov
Thanks, robots.

Bring the Troops Home:
http://bringthemhomenow.org

Fight Spam:
http://bluesecurity.com
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 27, 2005 10:06:44 PM

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

On Wed, 24 Aug 2005 14:31:34 -0700, "Ed Light" <nobody@nobody.there> wrote:

>Don't try it yet unless you can do it on a throwaway partition. It really
>wrecked my test partition -- I had to delete the partition and start over.
>Locks up, even after uninstall and reinstall of 5.5. Good old 5.5.

OTOH, I've got it installed on three XP SP2 systems and have not had a
single problem. YMMV.
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 28, 2005 3:27:22 AM

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

maduser@bagspammers.net wrote:

>
>OTOH, I've got it installed on three XP SP2 systems and have not had a
>single problem. YMMV.

I installed it on two XP systems. One was fine as long as I turned
off the spyware stuff. The other was a total disaster. ZA flagged
every interaction and wouldn't remember anything. I was doing nothing
but telling ZA that it was OK for programs to invoke Internet
Explorer, including Zone Alarm. I finally had to remove it and go
back to version 5.

I was most amused that removing it prompted me to answer an survey
about why....and even that got flagged by ZA.
Anonymous
a b 8 Security
August 29, 2005 4:04:08 AM

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

In WG5Pe.124866$E95.79980@fed1read01, Ed Light <nobody@nobody.there> wrote:

> Don't try it yet unless you can do it on a throwaway partition. It really
> wrecked my test partition -- I had to delete the partition and start over.
> Locks up, even after uninstall and reinstall of 5.5. Good old 5.5.

ZoneAlarm 6 scragged two of my XP development boxes. Named pipes would
close prematurely, and WMI/WBEM was hosed. Uninstall left the IP stack
destroyed.

Later I figured out that to recover from de-installation of ZA 6 you must
manually reset the IP stack.

Open a command prompt and type:

netsh
netsh> interface ip reset c:\foo.log

c:\foo.log can be any scratch file. Reboot. Then run the Network control
panel applet, select TCP/IP Protocol -> Properties, and manually restore the
IP address, netmask, and DNS settings. Then write a flame letter to
ZoneLabs :-(

Regards,
-Alan (alank@NOSPAMalgintech-dot-com)
!