Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Firewalls

Last response: in Windows 95/98/ME
Share
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 12:29:05 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing. I don't
use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over to
broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out what was easy
to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with Win98SE, I'd
like to install an old version of Kerio Personal Firewall.

Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003 vintage I
believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex, bloated,
firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3 (7.3mb),
which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second choice.)

Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one you
install yourself, and is that a good idea?

More about : firewalls

Anonymous
August 10, 2005 12:29:06 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

In article <ueMhKKUnFHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>, "Roger Fink"
<fink@*****.net> wrote:
>General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing. I don't
>use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over to
>broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out what was easy
>to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with Win98SE, I'd
>like to install an old version of Kerio Personal Firewall.
>
>Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003 vintage I
>believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex, bloated,
>firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3 (7.3mb),
>which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second choice.)
>
>Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
>installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one you
>install yourself, and is that a good idea?

A home broadband router (like the ones from Linksys, Netgear, D-Link,
Belkin, etc) acts as a firewall, blocking undesired incoming traffic
from the Internet to your computers. You don't need a software
firewall for that.

A software firewall can also block undesired outgoing traffic from
your computers to the Internet, which can result from a computer
virus, spyware, etc. If that's important to you, be sure that the
program you install has that capability. I'm sorry, but I'm not
familiar with Kerio.

I'd choose my own firewall rather than using a typical ISP-provided
package. Who's your ISP, and what is it offering?
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 1:23:32 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

I would only install a fully up-to-date third-party firewall that's
Win9x-compatible.

I would not rely any ISP-provided security application, personally, and that
would include a firewall.
--
~Robear Dyer (PA Bear)
MS MVP-Windows (IE/OE) & Security

Roger Fink wrote:
> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing. I
> don't
> use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over to
> broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out what was
> easy
> to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with Win98SE, I'd
> like to install an old version of Kerio Personal Firewall.
>
> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003 vintage
> I
> believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex, bloated,
> firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3 (7.3mb),
> which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second choice.)
>
> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one you
> install yourself, and is that a good idea?
Related resources
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 1:36:36 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

With firewalls what exactly is it that gets upgraded when a new version is
released? Are there new threats or techniques of infiltration that can't be
handled in the older versions?

PA Bear wrote:
> I would only install a fully up-to-date third-party firewall that's
> Win9x-compatible.
>
> I would not rely any ISP-provided security application, personally,
> and that would include a firewall.
>
> Roger Fink wrote:
>> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing.
>> I don't
>> use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over
>> to broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out
>> what was easy
>> to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with
>> Win98SE, I'd like to install an old version of Kerio Personal
>> Firewall.
>>
>> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003
>> vintage I
>> believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex, bloated,
>> firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3
>> (7.3mb), which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second
>> choice.)
>>
>> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
>> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one
>> you install yourself, and is that a good idea?
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 2:00:00 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Long story short: IMO you can compare the security provided by an outdated
firewall to the security offered by, e.g., NAV 2000 with no virus
definitions later than 15 December 2000.
--
~PA Bear

Roger Fink wrote:
> With firewalls what exactly is it that gets upgraded when a new version is
> released? Are there new threats or techniques of infiltration that can't
> be
> handled in the older versions?
>
> PA Bear wrote:
>> I would only install a fully up-to-date third-party firewall that's
>> Win9x-compatible.
>>
>> I would not rely any ISP-provided security application, personally,
>> and that would include a firewall.
>>
>> Roger Fink wrote:
>>> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing.
>>> I don't
>>> use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over
>>> to broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out
>>> what was easy
>>> to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with
>>> Win98SE, I'd like to install an old version of Kerio Personal
>>> Firewall.
>>>
>>> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003
>>> vintage I
>>> believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex, bloated,
>>> firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3
>>> (7.3mb), which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second
>>> choice.)
>>>
>>> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
>>> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one
>>> you install yourself, and is that a good idea?
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 2:15:11 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

OK.
Kerio's latest version, 4.2, doesn't list Windows 98 as being supported (it
may be though, because they only say specifically that it won't support
Windows 95 because Microsoft doesn't support Windows 95). Bottom line,
firewalls for this OS will soon be limited to a couple of niche players, if
that. Like A/V only worse.

PA Bear wrote:
> Long story short: IMO you can compare the security provided by an
> outdated firewall to the security offered by, e.g., NAV 2000 with no
> virus definitions later than 15 December 2000.
>
> Roger Fink wrote:
>> With firewalls what exactly is it that gets upgraded when a new
>> version is released? Are there new threats or techniques of
>> infiltration that can't be
>> handled in the older versions?
>>
>> PA Bear wrote:
>>> I would only install a fully up-to-date third-party firewall that's
>>> Win9x-compatible.
>>>
>>> I would not rely any ISP-provided security application, personally,
>>> and that would include a firewall.
>>>
>>> Roger Fink wrote:
>>>> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost
>>>> nothing.
>>>> I don't
>>>> use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over
>>>> to broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out
>>>> what was easy
>>>> to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with
>>>> Win98SE, I'd like to install an old version of Kerio Personal
>>>> Firewall.
>>>>
>>>> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003
>>>> vintage I
>>>> believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex,
>>>> bloated, firewalls currently available? (I also download version
>>>> 4.1.3 (7.3mb), which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second
>>>> choice.)
>>>>
>>>> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of
>>>> their installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place
>>>> of one
>>>> you install yourself, and is that a good idea?
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 3:07:17 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Roger, I don't agree entirely with my illustrious colleague ;-) that using an
older version of a firewall is the same as using an outdated version of an
anti-virus. Firewalls do not get updates the way an anti-virus does. One *can* use
an older version with great success, but you have to do a bit more work, as newer
versions of the programs will have bug fixes, and often more detection and logging
options. I have been using Kerio 2.1.5 on one system for quite a while, and the
same version of Tiny on another system. With both programs you must create a rule
set that goes a bit farther than what you are given "out of the box". Here are some
links regarding some of the rule set tweaks that can be done to afford more
protection from those versions of Kerio/Tiny, though most would also apply to the
latest versions:

Kerio and pre-v3.0 Tiny PFW:
http://www.dslreports.com/faq/security/2.5.1.+Kerio+and...

Generic Rule Set for Kerio (Proxy and no Proxy):
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6642367~mode=fla...

Kerio - Example ICMP rules:
http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,2649460~mode=fla...

Unless your system is rather old and slow, you will be better off with the newest
version your system will support. Note that Kerio version 4.2.0 does NOT support or
run on Windows 9x, Me, NT, 2000 Server and 2003 Server. It requires Win2K or XP.
http://www.kerio.com/kpf_requirements.html

You can see what changes were implemented through the version 4.x builds, here:
http://www.kerio.com/kpf_releasehistory.html
It might help you understand what went into each release, and why.

Re: your other question, what ISP are you using, and what firewall app are they
supplying?
--
Glen Ventura, MS MVP Shell/User, A+
http://dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"Roger Fink" <fink@*****.net> wrote in message
news:ueMhKKUnFHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing. I don't
> use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over to
> broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out what was easy
> to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with Win98SE, I'd
> like to install an old version of Kerio Personal Firewall.
>
> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003 vintage I
> believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex, bloated,
> firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3 (7.3mb),
> which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second choice.)
>
> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one you
> install yourself, and is that a good idea?
>
>
>
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 3:21:43 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Steve Winograd [MVP] wrote:
> In article <ueMhKKUnFHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>, "Roger Fink"
> <fink@*****.net> wrote:
>> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing.
>> I don't use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to
>> switch over to broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to
>> find out what was easy to set up and use, functioned well, and
>> worked smoothly with Win98SE, I'd like to install an old version of
>> Kerio Personal Firewall.
>>
>> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003
>> vintage I believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more
>> complex, bloated, firewalls currently available? (I also download
>> version 4.1.3 (7.3mb), which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as
>> a second choice.)
>>
>> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
>> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one
>> you install yourself, and is that a good idea?
>
> A home broadband router (like the ones from Linksys, Netgear, D-Link,
> Belkin, etc) acts as a firewall, blocking undesired incoming traffic
> from the Internet to your computers. You don't need a software
> firewall for that.
>
> A software firewall can also block undesired outgoing traffic from
> your computers to the Internet, which can result from a computer
> virus, spyware, etc. If that's important to you, be sure that the
> program you install has that capability. I'm sorry, but I'm not
> familiar with Kerio.
>
> I'd choose my own firewall rather than using a typical ISP-provided
> package. Who's your ISP, and what is it offering?

The provider would be Verizon. The package includes "Microsoft Premium
Internet Software", not sure what that is, and as an extra they offer a
package of Anti-virus, Firewall, Parental/Content Controls, Anti-Spyware and
Pop-up/Ad Blocker. They don't mention product names. Since the security
package is an add-on obviously it's not forced on you and one option is to
not to get it.
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 3:56:20 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Re the ISP and what they are providing, please see my response to Steve
Winograd's post. Depending on how long I keep the OS, at some point (maybe
now) the kind of customization you refer to will be required, since the
legacy 4.1.3 is latest version still compatible. So, ease of set-up is
probably not a compelling factor anymore. I do think PA Bear has a point in
that, within a given series at least, and maybe from series to series, the
upgrades were to plug holes in the previous release, as was the case with
the release of 4.1.3. The thing I worry about is Norton-like bloat, and
having something basically designed for XP carrying all that baggage. On
Windows 98 NAV 2000 wasn't too bad; NAV 2004-05 is by all accounts
hellacious (I wouldn't know - slid over to Avast! after NAV 2003). So, to
get back on topic, I know where 2.1.5 is on the compatibility scale, but
would probably choose 4.1.3 if I knew it worked smoothly with 98.

These look like great reference links - I'm saving this one. Thanks for your
response.

glee wrote:
> Roger, I don't agree entirely with my illustrious colleague ;-)
> that using an older version of a firewall is the same as using an
> outdated version of an anti-virus. Firewalls do not get updates the
> way an anti-virus does. One *can* use an older version with great
> success, but you have to do a bit more work, as newer versions of the
> programs will have bug fixes, and often more detection and logging
> options. I have been using Kerio 2.1.5 on one system for quite a
> while, and the same version of Tiny on another system. With both
> programs you must create a rule set that goes a bit farther than what
> you are given "out of the box". Here are some links regarding some
> of the rule set tweaks that can be done to afford more protection
> from those versions of Kerio/Tiny, though most would also apply to
> the latest versions:
>
> Kerio and pre-v3.0 Tiny PFW:
>
http://www.dslreports.com/faq/security/2.5.1.+Kerio+and...
>
> Generic Rule Set for Kerio (Proxy and no Proxy):
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,6642367~mode=fla...
>
> Kerio - Example ICMP rules:
> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,2649460~mode=fla...
>
> Unless your system is rather old and slow, you will be better off
> with the newest version your system will support. Note that Kerio
> version 4.2.0 does NOT support or run on Windows 9x, Me, NT, 2000
> Server and 2003 Server. It requires Win2K or XP.
> http://www.kerio.com/kpf_requirements.html
>
> You can see what changes were implemented through the version 4.x
> builds, here: http://www.kerio.com/kpf_releasehistory.html
> It might help you understand what went into each release, and why.
>
> Re: your other question, what ISP are you using, and what firewall
> app are they supplying?
>
> "Roger Fink" <fink@*****.net> wrote in message
> news:ueMhKKUnFHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
>> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing.
>> I don't
>> use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over
>> to
>> broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out what
>> was easy
>> to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with
>> Win98SE, I'd
>> like to install an old version of Kerio Personal Firewall.
>>
>> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003
>> vintage I believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more
>> complex, bloated,
>> firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3
>> (7.3mb),
>> which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second choice.)
>>
>> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
>> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one
>> you
>> install yourself, and is that a good idea?
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 4:19:14 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Roger Fink wrote:
<snip>
>> I'd choose my own firewall rather than using a typical ISP-provided
>> package. Who's your ISP, and what is it offering?
>
> The provider would be Verizon. The package includes "Microsoft Premium
> Internet Software...

No such animal. "MSN Premium Internet Software" (AKA MSN9, MSN Explorer) is
a different beast:

http://www22.verizon.com/forhomedsl/channels/dsl/faqs3....

http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa&pgmarket=en-us&xAPI...
--
~PA Bear
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 4:30:23 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

PA Bear wrote:
> Roger Fink wrote:
> <snip>
>>> I'd choose my own firewall rather than using a typical ISP-provided
>>> package. Who's your ISP, and what is it offering?
>>
>> The provider would be Verizon. The package includes "Microsoft
>> Premium Internet Software...
>
> No such animal. "MSN Premium Internet Software" (AKA MSN9, MSN
> Explorer) is a different beast:

....but a beast nonetheless (shoulda cut and pasted)


> http://www22.verizon.com/forhomedsl/channels/dsl/faqs3....
>
> http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa&pgmarket=en-us&xAPI...
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 4:51:46 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

In article <uB7MnqVnFHA.576@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl>, "Roger Fink"
<fink@*****.net> wrote:
>> A home broadband router (like the ones from Linksys, Netgear, D-Link,
>> Belkin, etc) acts as a firewall, blocking undesired incoming traffic
>> from the Internet to your computers. You don't need a software
>> firewall for that.
>>
>> A software firewall can also block undesired outgoing traffic from
>> your computers to the Internet, which can result from a computer
>> virus, spyware, etc. If that's important to you, be sure that the
>> program you install has that capability. I'm sorry, but I'm not
>> familiar with Kerio.
>>
>> I'd choose my own firewall rather than using a typical ISP-provided
>> package. Who's your ISP, and what is it offering?
>
>The provider would be Verizon. The package includes "Microsoft Premium
>Internet Software", not sure what that is, and as an extra they offer a
>package of Anti-virus, Firewall, Parental/Content Controls, Anti-Spyware and
>Pop-up/Ad Blocker. They don't mention product names. Since the security
>package is an add-on obviously it's not forced on you and one option is to
>not to get it.

Thanks for the details, Roger. I'm not familiar with the Verizon
offering or any existing product like that from Microsoft. I once
tried a similar offering from Comcast, but I didn't like the lack of
control that it gave me over its operation. And, as I said, I prefer
to choose my own software.
--
Best Wishes,
Steve Winograd, MS-MVP (Windows Networking)

Please post any reply as a follow-up message in the news group
for everyone to see. I'm sorry, but I don't answer questions
addressed directly to me in E-mail or news groups.

Microsoft Most Valuable Professional - Windows Networking
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com

Steve Winograd's Networking FAQ
http://www.bcmaven.com/networking/faq.htm
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 6:26:42 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 20:29:05 -0400, "Roger Fink" <fink@*****.net>
wrote:

>General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing. I don't
>use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over to
>broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out what was easy
>to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with Win98SE, I'd
>like to install an old version of Kerio Personal Firewall.
>
>Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003 vintage I
>believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex, bloated,
>firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3 (7.3mb),
>which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second choice.)
>
>Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
>installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one you
>install yourself, and is that a good idea?
>
>
I use Tiny's Personal Firewall
Detects changed executables trying to use network
Easy to set up and will allow dynamic permit / deny rules
as and when needed.


--

Steve
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 6:26:43 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Steve Walton wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 20:29:05 -0400, "Roger Fink" <fink@*****.net>
> wrote:
>
>> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing.
>> I don't use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to
>> switch over to broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to
>> find out what was easy to set up and use, functioned well, and
>> worked smoothly with Win98SE, I'd like to install an old version of
>> Kerio Personal Firewall.
>>
>> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003
>> vintage I believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more
>> complex, bloated, firewalls currently available? (I also download
>> version 4.1.3 (7.3mb), which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as
>> a second choice.)
>>
>> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
>> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one
>> you install yourself, and is that a good idea?
>>
>>
> I use Tiny's Personal Firewall
> Detects changed executables trying to use network
> Easy to set up and will allow dynamic permit / deny rules
> as and when needed.

Tiny=Kerio, at least in V.2
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 1:01:27 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Roger Fink wrote:
> The provider would be Verizon. The package includes "Microsoft Premium
> Internet Software", not sure what that is, and as an extra they offer
> a package of Anti-virus, Firewall, Parental/Content Controls,
> Anti-Spyware and Pop-up/Ad Blocker. They don't mention product names.
> Since the security package is an add-on obviously it's not forced on
> you and one option is to not to get it.

All MSN stuff, avoid all. With the possible exception being MSN Money
if that appeals to you.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 1:09:00 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Roger Fink wrote:

> So, to get back
> on topic, I know where 2.1.5 is on the compatibility scale, but would
> probably choose 4.1.3 if I knew it worked smoothly with 98.


It works fine for me, Win98 SE.

--
dadiOH
____________________________

dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 2:33:56 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

dadiOH wrote:
> Roger Fink wrote:
>> The provider would be Verizon. The package includes "Microsoft
>> Premium Internet Software", not sure what that is, and as an extra
>> they offer a package of Anti-virus, Firewall, Parental/Content
>> Controls, Anti-Spyware and Pop-up/Ad Blocker. They don't mention
>> product names. Since the security package is an add-on obviously
>> it's not forced on you and one option is to not to get it.
>
> All MSN stuff, avoid all. With the possible exception being MSN Money
> if that appeals to you.

Yeah, I hope and assume there's a workaround for unsolicited content
packages and application software.

dadiOH - I downloaded your Dandies awhile back. Should help me wade through
Audio Cleaning Lab, if I can ever get around to it. Great stuff.
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 2:38:20 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

dadiOH wrote:
> Roger Fink wrote:
>
>> So, to get back
>> on topic, I know where 2.1.5 is on the compatibility scale, but would
>> probably choose 4.1.3 if I knew it worked smoothly with 98.
>
>
> It works fine for me, Win98 SE.

Good to hear that. I was even able to locate a pdf user manual for 4.1.3
(and 2.1.5) in remote corners of the internet, so I think I'll be fine
Anonymous
August 10, 2005 4:43:59 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

Hello,

"Roger Fink" <fink@*****.net> wrote in message
news:ueMhKKUnFHA.2180@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost nothing. I
> don't
> use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch over to
> broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out what was
> easy
> to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with Win98SE, I'd
> like to install an old version of Kerio Personal Firewall.
>
> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid 2003 vintage
> I
> believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex, bloated,
> firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3 (7.3mb),
> which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second choice.)
>
> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part of their
> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of one you
> install yourself, and is that a good idea?

Kerio 2 is O.K, but Look'n'Stop 2.05 is even better (not free)
and it works in Windows 95:
http://www.looknstop.com/En/looknstop.htm

Some tests (october 2004)
http://www.firewallleaktester.com/tests.htm

Latest release is 2.05p2 (october 2004), 2.05p3 beta is planned soon
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=90636
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=85349

Regards, Roman


P.S. One more link:
http://forums.maddoktor2.com/index.php?showtopic=3989
August 10, 2005 5:37:27 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion (More info?)

"" wrote:
> General question about firewalls, about which I know almost
> nothing. I don't
> use one, but that will likely change soon, as I plan to switch
> over to
> broadband. Based on searching newsgroups and such to find out
> what was easy
> to set up and use, functioned well, and worked smoothly with
> Win98SE, I'd
> like to install an old version of Kerio Personal Firewall.
>
> Is there any reason why Kerio 2.1.5, which is only 2.1mb, mid
> 2003 vintage I
> believe, wouldn't work as well as some of the more complex,
> bloated,
> firewalls currently available? (I also download version 4.1.3
> (7.3mb),
> which was superceded this Spring by 4.2, as a second choice.)
>
> Finally, broadband providers seem to offer firewalls as part
> of their
> installation package. Is it possible to forgo that in place of
> one you
> install yourself, and is that a good idea?

So your on dial-up now?

If your used to having no firewall and cope with this sort of thing
then there is no reason to get one, becasue unfirewalled dial-up
connections are just as vunarable as unfirewalled "broadband"
conntions. How ever if you do the right thing you should always be
running a firewall, the windows firewall is teribly inadiquit, so you
should use a fire wall such as zone alarm or Kerio, and there is no
reason to show that kerio is not as effective as more complex
firewalls (say zone alarm) other then zone labs are more reputable.

--
Posted using the http://www.windowsforumz.com interface, at author's request
Articles individually checked for conformance to usenet standards
Topic URL: http://www.windowsforumz.com/General-Discussion-Firewal...
Visit Topic URL to contact author (reg. req'd). Report abuse: http://www.windowsforumz.com/eform.php?p=1349408
!