Archived from groups: comp.security.firewalls (
More info?)
"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:MPG.1d850e7a198741ca989e8e@news-server.columbus.rr.com...
> In article <o7mdnULx4YRSrobeRVn-3g@comcast.com>, charlesnewman1
> @comcast.spam-be-gon.net says...
> >
> > "Volker Birk" <bumens@dingens.org> wrote in message
> > news:431adda7@news.uni-ulm.de...
> > > Charles Newman <charlesnewman1@comcast.spam-be-gon.net> wrote:
> > > > > wondering which firewalls are compatible with windows xp home sp2
> > > > There is only one answer, Tiny. While it is no longer
> > > > free, and costs $99 for the latest version, Tiny can
> > > > do a lot more than other software firewalls.
> > >
> > > Well, reciting <43193c98@news.uni-ulm.de>
> > >
> > > Tiny "Personal Firewall" does not filter all network servers in the
> > > standard configuration. This makes Tiny unusable for Joe Average.
> > >
> > > Tiny cannot prevent spyware from sending your personal information
> > > across the Internet; it failed in our tests together with the rest of
the
> > > "Personal Firewalls".
> > >
> > > Tiny does not make a PC "invisible" or "stealth" in the Internet, as
> > > this is not possible at all.
> > >
> > > And:
> > >
> > > Tiny "Personal Firewall" installs SYSTEM-Services, which open
> > > windows.
> > >
> > > This is a gross error, because this breaches security. Tiny show here,
> > > that they never read Microsoft's design guidlines for system services:
> > >
> > >
http://msdn.microsoft.com/libr ary/en-us/dllproc/base/interac
tive_serv...
> > >
> > > For a software, which should enhance security, this design flow means
the
> > > declaration of bankruptcy.
> > >
> > > Yours,
> > > VB.
> > > --
> > > "Es kann nicht sein, dass die Frustrierten in Rom bestimmen, was in
> > > deutschen Schlafzimmern passiert".
> > > Harald Schmidt zum "Weltjugendtag"
> >
> > Tiny is the only software firewall, however, that
> > can block and/or restrict outbound communications.
> > The only other solution would be to buy a hardware
> > appliance that would be several times the cost of
> > Tiny, and would not be as flexible or customizable
> > as Tiny
>
> ZoneAlarm can do the same and it's easier for novices to understand.
The trouble with ZoneAlarm, as with MacAfee
and BlackIce, is that they only protect against
inbound connections, and are not very customizable
to your needs. With Tiny, I can restrict which
applications on my NAT box can go where.
You cannot do that with ZoneAlarm, MacAfee,
or BlackIce. If you are serious about security, and
dont want to spend hundreds of dollars on a
hardware appliance, then Tiny is your best bet.
At the $99 they are now charging, it would be
well worth the price. You can get something that
is just as good as, if not better than, a hardware
appliance, for a fraction of the price. The $99
professional version can also implement filtering
rules by specific user. That is something that
ZoneAlarm, MacAfee, and BlackIce cannot do.
Not even hardware appliances have learnd that
one yet.
Tiny can also instanly notify you of any
attempted activity not in the ruleset, so you can
decide whether to ban or allow it in the future.
This is something the other software firewalls,
as well as hardware appliances, have not learned
yet.