Avast WEBforum
Consumer Products => Avast Free Antivirus / Premium Security (legacy Pro Antivirus, Internet Security, Premier) => Topic started by: RV01 on March 30, 2005, 10:43:12 PM
-
My query is the following: I don't know if I should allow avast web scanner. I have sygate personal firewall, my OS is millennium and I don't know if allowing this application I would run any risk. I am a home user .What should I do
Thanks for the help in advance :)
-
The simple answer is yes. However if you experience any problems search the forum for sygate firewall. There are a few threads on it.. :)
-
My query is the following: I don't know if I should allow avast web scanner. I have sygate personal firewall, my OS is millennium and I don't know if allowing this application I would run any risk. I am a home user. What should I do.
Disabling the provider you're not solving the problem... just pretending it does not exist.
A lot of nowadays malwares take advantage of various exploits and bugs of the browsers, especially Internet Explorer.
Letting avast scanning the HTTP streams through WebShield is the only way to prevent the infection.
Just setting the Standard Shield to High sensitivity (resident filesystem scanner) won't solve... It will be too late.
-
Hence what should I do? Should I change browser? ???
-
Hence what should I do? Should I change browser? ???
Why?
WebShield works with any browser...
Which one do you use?
-
Internet Explorer 6
-
What I see is that if you want to change anything is your firewall...
Sygate has a problem/bug with local proxies (like WebShield of avast and any other local proxy, like Proxomitron or any anonymizer program).
I suggest you test ZoneAlarm (free) or Kerio (free). 8)
With Millenium, to use WebShield you must set your browser to use a proxy:
server: localhost
port number: 12080
Can you try?
-
Could you please tell me how to set my browser to use a proxy:
server: localhost
port number: 12080
Or is it easier and safer to change my firewall? ???
-
I would use Sygate firewall. It is a great one and works also well with the WebShield. No problems like ZA user's are having. Kerio might be a memory hog on Me.
Firewalls are stuff that need really some learning, before they give optimum performance. Some users are as ignorant as Technical was, and then just rant what ever comes in their mind. Needs to do some research first.
-
Technical knows exactly what he si talking about. Sygate gave all kind of problems and many avast! users already reported them... use search function in these forums. On the other hand, ZoneAlarm never ever gave me any single problem you are talking about. Also, the other one that Technical mentioned, Kerio firewall, is a way better solution than Sygate, even Outpost Freeware...
By the way, RV01, if you wanna be real protected, buy yourself a real hardware router/firewall, then you can speak about some decent level of security and protection... ;)
@ RV01 - you wrote:
My query is the following: I don't know if I should allow avast web scanner. I have sygate personal firewall, my OS is millennium and I don't know if allowing this application I would run any risk. I am a home user .What should I do
Thanks for the help in advance :)
Of course you have to give "green light" to avast! web scanner... if you wanna be protected in that field, you have to enable WEB SHILED provider. No risk at all, you can just increase your level of protection by enabling WEB SHIELD, nothing else... You also asked this:
Or is it easier and safer to change my firewall? ???
What would it solve ? Nothing... every other decent firewall would ask you exactly the same question because it has to know should it let WEB SHIELD access internet or not... that's why we have firewalls installed after all, don't we ? ;)
Cheers !
-
Sygate gave all kind of problems and many avast! users already reported them... use search function in these forums.
I participated in those threads and really it was mostlly heresay and the way the first build of WebShield behaved.
Sash, care to elaborate those current problems?
Kerio firewall, is a way better solution than Sygate, even Outpost Freeware...
Those are your opinions, nothing more. Subjective as mine too.
-
Ran into some problems with Kerio 4. Switched to 4.1.3 and had the same problems I encountered with 4.2B4-Kerio doesn't always load at boot . Saw a few other messages about this on their website. No solution-don't know what the conflict is. In spite of being installed as an automatic service under XP SP2, it just comes up partially at boot (based on "protect a startup and shutdown being checked") and then goes away, never to be seen again, until you start it manually. Also tried putting it in the startup folder;didn't help. Happened only occasionally with 4.1.2. Watch carefully to be sure KPF 4 is really running if you plan to use it. No comment from their forum on the questions about it. Sygate is looking better again, unless Kerio comes up with an explanation/fix. At least the problems are well understood and manageable in the avast context.
-
.
.
.
Sash, care to elaborate those current problems?
Sygate developers never did anything to solve those problems on Windows shutdown. Many people reported those problems, as well as myself.
http://forums.sygate.com/vb/showthread.php?s=0f55cc62717d770dce53465b79e1cbcd&threadid=10823&highlight=shutdown
http://forums.sygate.com/vb/showthread.php?s=0f55cc62717d770dce53465b79e1cbcd&threadid=12361&highlight=shutdown
http://forums.sygate.com/vb/showthread.php?s=0f55cc62717d770dce53465b79e1cbcd&threadid=12381&highlight=shutdown
http://forums.sygate.com/vb/showthread.php?s=0f55cc62717d770dce53465b79e1cbcd&threadid=11452&highlight=shutdown
http://forums.sygate.com/vb/showthread.php?s=0f55cc62717d770dce53465b79e1cbcd&threadid=11488&highlight=shutdown
http://forums.sygate.com/vb/showthread.php?s=0f55cc62717d770dce53465b79e1cbcd&threadid=6919&highlight=shutdown
and so on, and so on... not to flood this reply...
Of course, nothing that forum members advised helped at all... Sygate is doing nothing to fix that issue, so I gave up. Went back to ZA, works perfect with my hardware router/firewall and I'm sticking to it...
Cheers !
-
Those threads you are giving have nothing to do though with this thread.
I have never experienced those shutdown problems, running SPF 5.5.2710 currently. Maybe they had been using ZA or other firewall before, and not managed to completely uninstall all the components before running SPF?
It is true that the latest security center recognizing firewall has been getting some negative responses. That is why I have not upgraded.
But in this thread's context I considered Technical's replies again misleading and poorly thought beforehand.
-
Those threads you are giving have nothing to do though with this thread.
Maybe it has nothing to do with this thread, but it shows that Sygate is not without errors.... When we are at this, nothing you just said have anything with topic of this thread either... RV01 just asked should he give permission to avast! web scanner, not which firewall is better...
Maybe they had been using ZA or other firewall before, and not managed to completely uninstall all the components before running SPF?
It is true that the latest security center recognizing firewall has been getting some negative responses. That is why I have not upgraded.
That has nothing to do with improperly uninstalled ZA... I'm telling you, Sygate was the very first firewall I have ever had installed on this system (fairly new system). Even if I had ZA, I know exactly what should I do to uninstall it properly. I'm computer technician by profession and I work in my field for the last 15 years... so uninstalling ZA and removing all related registry keys is nothing extraterrestrial. I didn't even have to do that, and if I had to uninstall ZA prior to installing Sygate or any other firewall, I would rather restore one of my previous System Ghost image files... it would be much easier and much less painful, also much faster since restore procedure lasts for around 5 minutes on my system.
Again, "fighting" about whose firewall is better or safer is nonsense. Different strokes for different folks... it was always like that and it will be, but telling that Technical don't know what he is talking about is useles. Believe me, he is here long enough to know what he is talking about... Which Firewall ? Use what makes you happy and what gives you best results, and what you are comfortable with.
-
Firewalls are stuff that need really some learning, before they give optimum performance. Some users are as ignorant as Technical was, and then just rant what ever comes in their mind. Needs to do some research first.
Take care of your words... they could be interpreted in more than a single way... :(
If you want to defend Sygate, please, don't offend me. You'll be in deep disavantage ;D
-
I considered Technical's replies again misleading and poorly thought beforehand.
It's a pity that you come here just to blame me.
I was trying to help RV01 and I think he has nothing against me as you. :P
-
No, I have nothing against you Technical. I am against few of your opinions, like suggestions changing firewall like just that. Or talking about "bugs".
Even before I had installed Avast's WebShield I was familiar with the local proxy no no and Sygate. Never had a local proxy software before in my computer. You on the other hand were so ignorant that it needed a WebShield to waken you up. And then just keep on ranting.
A firewall as I told is something more personal than an antivirus. Well depends on the interests, but for normal users I would imagine it takes more to figure out how to operate it.
And as I have said a few times, i consider the webshield a rather well behaved local proxy with SPF.
I see no reason why RV01 should change the firewall if he only uses WebShield.
-
You on the other hand were so ignorant that it needed a WebShield to waken you up. And then just keep on ranting.
I'm not an ignorant. I just don't think I know everything.
I can learn. I need to learn. I don't have to defend myself as I did nothing wrong.
You, on contrary, has to explain to the other users why you're talking about me this way.
-
Trying to do what I ever tried here, help...
Could you please tell me how to set my browser to use a proxy:
server: localhost
port number: 12080
Proxy configuration into Internet Explorer:
Tools > Internet Options > Connections > Lan Settings > Check 'Use a proxy server' and configure it
Or is it easier and safer to change my firewall? ???
Well, it's not that simple. Enabling WebShield is a good protection. The 'problem' with the firewall is not being alerted when a program is connecting and using WebShield as a 'tunnel' (local proxy). I suggest the same as before, uninstall Sygate and give a try on ZoneAlarm (or if you want Kerio, but it seems not a good idea on Windows Me for other users).
Never use two antivirus at the same time in the same computer.
Never use two firewalls at the same time in the same computer.
ZoneAlarm (free) could be found here: www.zonelabs.com
-
Yes, and if you find ZoneAlarm little "heavy" on resources (even, it's just a hoax, c'mon people... how many of you are running 386 SX out there ?), you can give a try to Outpost freeware.
However, ZoneAlarm is best possible solution for beginners, easy to install, easy to use, very user friendly, so you won't make a wrong move if you choose ZA. By the way, some issues mentioned in this thread, were regarding ZoneAlarm Pro (by the way, fixed by now), not Freeware edition, so you don't have to worry a thing.
If we want to be 100% truthful, let's teleport ourselves on this page:
http://tooleaky.zensoft.com/
You all will find how illusive is all this software firewalls fama... people, go and get yourself one of those hardware routers/firewalls. They can be found for as low as $25 CAD nowadays...
-
Jarmo:
Avast ye picaroon! Prepare to be boarded or dance the hempen jig!
-
Culpeper - cooldownpeper, hahaha !!! ;D ;D ;D
Don't start, otherwise I will take out my... ughhh.... (you have to tell me how you say SWORD in pirate language ;D ) ;D
-
Aye, it's called a Cutlass, matey!
-
Thanks matey !
It looks like we all calmed down... I don't have to take out my Cutlass (it still has some blood on it... I killed one chicken this morning... my mates were hungry)
;D ;D ;D
-
Please let me jump in here to make a few comments.
Firstly, the Web Shield has had some problems with BOTH Zone Alarm and Sygate but not in every case. I use Sygate and the Web Shield on my XP and have no trouble at all. On another, I have Zone Alarm without incident. In many cases where a user has problems, it has been found that a configuration error was present usually in the proxy setting.
Sygate is a fine firewall, and so is Zone Alarm. Kerio and Outpost have a heavy learning curve and you DO need to learn them! (as Sash@ has said)
REMEMBER that opinions and advice given here at just that. There is NO offense to be taken and there should NEVER be any thrown at anyone here!
I have read the posts in the thread and do not think that the "words" used at Technical were at all fair or justified.
Proper conduct is essential here in the forum by everyone!
Technical is quite versed in Avast as am I and we offer what knowledge we have whether others agree with it or not. Technical's information was not ignorant, misleading or ranting! It was actually sound information. His suggestions were fine and his recommendation to change browser was indeed a good one. I do not care for IE and use Firefox. Technical happens to be very calm and takes time with his explanations. We are not always correct but we do the best we can.
In all of his 9000+ posts, I have never known him to be anything but a gentleman.
There is no time for insulting behavior here. Please keep to the subject at hand and let's move on.
Thank you
Techie101
-
Come on guys, try to keep to the subject. Instead this came some pro Technical thread.
A guy comes first to ask if he should turn on the webshield while running SPF.
Essexboy gives a non biased answer.
Then comes Technical to rant away and scare the original questioner, while there is no reason to do so. So I come in and give my opinion, and also trying to remind that not the words of Technical should be trusted as coming from an expert in this matter.
Then comes all the hulabaloo.
Enough said.
I leave you to play in your own playground boys.
-
So, what exactly is this thread about?
1. The initial question was if turning on the WebShield while running Sygate is safe.
2. Then Jarmo P feels somehow offended when people start suggesting to dump Sygate and use something else.
Here's my comments to both of those:
1. Frankly, we (the team) find the whole Sygate-WebShield discussion exaggerated. With the new 623 version, where WebShield is "opt-in" only (i.e. filters communication only from certain well defined (and quite likely trusted) apps), it's like 99% safe. Indeed, there are ways to "hack"such a configuration (which I won't discuss here) but the malware would have to be explicitly aware of the situation, which is quite unlikely... So, to answer the first question, I'd say that YES, definitely, it is safe to allow avast web scanner.
The original poster, RV01, should keep in mind, however, that since he's using Windows ME, it is necessary to configure the WebShield manually (by setting up the localhost proxy in IE). This is discussed in detail in the avast help file.
2. Jarmo P, no one was forcing you to dump Sygate. It was just a suggestion... but you obviously overreacted (instead of saying 'no thanks' you start calling people 'ignorants'. Sygate has its issues. It works for some, and doesn't work for other. The localhost issue is a long-standing one (but I understand that it cannot be simply _fixed_ - because the firewall engine, as it is now, is filtering at NDIS level, which never sees any localhost communication at all. Therefore, the code would have to be more or less rewritten to fix this issue).
But let me say again that the mere existence of WebShield would never cause me to dump Sygate (if I was otherwise happy with it) - because the localhost issue was very mitigated with the 623 release.
Thanks
Vlk
-
I would like to thank all of you who participated at this thread ;)
-
Personally I am waiting for the new version to show up before enabling Web Shield again...
-
Good post Vlk, and thx.
Well, I do hope that Technical's suggestion won't be to change firewall when someone comes to ask a question about SPF and Webshield. But I try to not get "offended" by him again. ;D
Agree with you that there is no reason to change either antivirus or firewall and to keep webshield running. Well there are people and there are people, "different strokes for different folks".
All so subjective.
-
I was also wondering if the fact that my internet connection is PSTN would change the way I should configure the proxy server ???
-
Proxy server setting for Windows 95, 98, and Millennium using the local area network (LAN):
Internet Explorer:
Start Internet Explorer.
Select Tools ® Internet Options... from the main menu.
Switch to page Connections.
Click on the LAN Settings... button.
Check the option Use a proxy server for your LAN
Write localhost into the Adress field (alternatively, you can enter IP address 127.0.0.1, which is the same as localhost).
Enter 12080 into the Port field.
Confirm with OK button.
Proxy server setting for Windows 95, 98, and Millennium using dial-up connection (modem):
Start Internet Explorer.
Select Tools ® Internet Options... from the main menu.
Switch to page Connections.
Select your dial-up connection from the list and click on the Settings... button.
Check the option Use a proxy server for this connection.
Write localhost into the Adress field (alternatively, you can enter IP address 127.0.0.1, which is the same as localhost).
Enter 12080 into the Port field.
Confirm with OK button.
I think there is no difference, you just select the connection as told in the above Avast help. Set a manual proxy for IE.
I do use Firefox browser and not IE.
Try it RV01, no use hesitating too much when it is easy to verify in praxis :)
-
Well, I do hope that Technical's suggestion won't be to change firewall when someone comes to ask a question about SPF and Webshield.
My suggestions have the strong they have.
You won't stole their value just because you think different.
But I try to not get "offended" by him again. ;D
This is the real kindergarten. After you offend me, I'm due to have offended you... Com'on boy, you're must be kidding.
-
Peace brother. Your suggestions have their strengths.
But reminding you that when you speak of a "bug", many of the users think there is something serious around that will immediately compromise their system.
They don't know anything else, just think there is some big hole when using WebShield.
Sygate's outbound application control is not very much weakened when running webshield in my experience.
Hope you understand my point also.
And Vlk's post helped, cause of course he has also some more prestige here than poor me.
-
But reminding you that when you speak of a "bug", many of the users think there is something serious around that will immediately compromise their system. They don't know anything else, just think there is some big hole when using WebShield.
The problem is not WebShield and never was.
The problem is on Sygate.
I use the same words that are posted in Sygate forum: bug/problem.
It's a shame that more than one year and the company could not solve - writting the code again or not - that a local proxy could be a hole in the outbound connections.
Sygate's outbound application control is not very much weakened when running webshield in my experience.
But, with your words, it is weakened in some extension anyway...
Vlk said 99% secure, there is not a problem... I know, I understand, but I'd like to see Sygate's guys working on it and not just silence.
There is not a word about the problem in the ReadMe or other easy found informations about Sygate.
Hope you understand my point also.
Sure, I'm glad we can speak in peace now.
Anyway, it won't change my point of view about Sygate.
And Vlk's post helped, cause of course he has also some more prestige here.
In fact, he's the boss 8)
-
The problem is not WebShield and never was.
The problem is on Sygate.
No one blamed anyone.
I wish to have a firewall like Sygate's without that local proxy issue!
But as Vlk told us, it would need a total rewrite, maybe a new design, who knows what it would involve.
So you can ask what you want, but we have to choose what is existing.
ZA for newbies is great. It has it's weaknesses as all the rest.
So does Sygate, it is also a kind of an easy software firewall, but more options than ZA. And not to be used with local proxies unless wanting just an XP SP2 firewall protection with though great logging abilities.
We can ask what we want, but as it is, I am happy with Avast team solution about their WebShield, how it works with SPF.
Sygate is a good firewall when running without other proxy software.
I tell you also here in public, that I have no connection to Sygate, except only as a forum member. Same as here, although feeling a bit bashed up now by you.
Sometimes I wish to try nitty gritty, like Kerio 2.15. It would be a good learning I think. Only I don't think I have time and energy to do what it takes. And I have some programs i want to keep working, heh.
But this thread was not really about firewalls, even I am not interested in them so much. Knowing HOW MUCH time it takes to learn.
It was just some guy who asked if he/she should allow Webshield while running Sygate.
And my answer is YES
-
Sygate works fine for me with the new webshield (apart from browser not being 'Ask'ed to connect to the internet.), so as far as I'm concerned, Sygate is still the best firewall out there, simply because i love the look and feel of it.
Zonealarm for me is a good firewall for me, but just seems to featureless and just generally doesn't look very nice (reminds me of the AVG GUI), plus it just doesn't seem to let you share files and printers on networks (free version only), but at being a firewall in general, steals and blocks ports very well.
Also i feel Technical wasn't being 'ignorant', he was just expressing his opinions on what to do (which since this is a public forum, he is intitled to).
--lee