Avast WEBforum
Other => General Topics => Topic started by: timcan on July 28, 2009, 11:39:29 AM
-
Previously a paid software is now freeware. :)
http://www.privacyware.com/personal_firewall.html (http://www.privacyware.com/personal_firewall.html)
-
Thanks for this information!
I just didn't find out if it also offers more languages... German for example... ;D
But actually I'm happy with my Windows Firwall...
This firewall has also some quiet good results at Matousec's Security Challenge (http://www.matousec.com/)... (see the picture)
kind regards
onlysomeone
EDIT: oops... forgot to add the picture...
-
Previously a paid software is now freeware. :)
http://www.privacyware.com/personal_firewall.html (http://www.privacyware.com/personal_firewall.html)
Thanks. Excellent find. Just finished installing it on one of the Windows 7 systems.
I noticed that this also works on Windows 7 64 bit systems. Very easy to install and use.
Seems to totally hide my WIFII
-
Hope to see Avast! 5 Firewall in October on this test :D
-
Previously a paid software is now freeware. :)
http://www.privacyware.com/personal_firewall.html (http://www.privacyware.com/personal_firewall.html)
Thanks. Excellent find. Just finished installing it on one of the Windows 7 systems.
I noticed that this also works on Windows 7 64 bit systems. Very easy to install and use.
Seems to totally hide my WIFII
You're welcome. :) Hope it works well for you.
-
hello, was also exited on this turning freeware, however on my system not all ports were stealthed and also the firewall logging did not work. HIPS part ok however...
brgds,
mack
-
I have taking a look at it and i did no find any picture for it. For sure also how mush ram and ressource and space he would use.
-
After an initial test and after the first reboot after install, I've removed it. :(
It tied my system into knots. Everything crawled and it took forever to finally get it un-installed.
Now the system is back to normal (using the Windows 7 firewall).
-
No problems for me yet :)
edit : using in windows 7
-
No problems for me yet :)
edit : using in windows 7
What other security products are you running ???
-
@bob3160
hey bob,
windows 7 32-bit
avast home- latest version
mbam-latest version
edit:mbam free version
-
@bob3160
hey bob,
windows 7 32-bit
avast home- latest version
mbam-latest version
edit:mbam free version
Maybe the difference is in what I'm running:
Win 7 32 bit
Microsoft Security Essentials
Avast Home
IOBit Security 360 Beta
ThreatFire
Windows Defender
WinPatrol Plus
-
@bob3160
oh! sorry.. i forgot windows defender. thats there on my system too.
-
Thanks, but ı use comodo firewall, it is the best firewall :)
-
There are many that will give you an argument about what is the best firewall ;D
-
I never used another software firewall only Windows because i trust more it than the other. So im happy with my current firewall and its sound bad like bob he said. So i wont take chance ill keep my current protection for sure.
-
So im happy with my current firewall and its sound bad like bob he said.
Please don't bypass trying this excellent product just because it didn't work out on my system.
Consider all of the security software I already have running in the background.
I'm sure the reason PrivateFirewall didn't work for me is my fault. Not the fault of the software. :)
-
The Webroot fw (http://www.webroot.com/En_US/consumer-products-desktopfirewall.html) is a version of Privatefirewall. I tried the Webroot fw when it became free and I didn't like it.
I'm happy with Online Armor, I see no reason trying another fw, at least until I can try the avast! Personal Firewall. ;)
-
first time I hear there will be an Avast fw...anywhere I can get more info about the project?
-
first time I hear there will be an Avast fw...anywhere I can get more info about the project?
http://blog.avast.com/2009/07/20/avast-5-is-coming-soon/ (http://blog.avast.com/2009/07/20/avast-5-is-coming-soon/)
-
first time I hear there will be an Avast fw...anywhere I can get more info about the project?
http://blog.avast.com/2009/07/20/avast-5-is-coming-soon/ (http://blog.avast.com/2009/07/20/avast-5-is-coming-soon/)
oh yeah, I knew that page, just forgot that a firewall tab appeared on one of the shots. Thanks anyway ;)
-
first time I hear there will be an Avast fw...anywhere I can get more info about the project?
http://blog.avast.com/2009/07/20/avast-5-is-coming-soon/ (http://blog.avast.com/2009/07/20/avast-5-is-coming-soon/)
oh yeah, I knew that page, just forgot that a firewall tab appeared on one of the shots. Thanks anyway ;)
Your welcome. Have a great weekend. :)
-
The whole point of a firewall is to effectively stealth your system from outside, all good firewalls do that as a matter of course rather than as an option.
Visit grc.com and look for shields up and that tests your firewalls ability to stealth it from view.
-
You're welcome.
-
The only firewall ill try will be Avast! Firewall (The trial and if i like it ill buy it when i will got the money for it) Also my current 1 is the Vista Firewall and im happy with it. :)
-
just one thing about Shields Up (grc): the result you get there depend at 99,9% on your router and its settings. Not much to do with your Windows based firewall. I had some fun once on Comodo forums about that with another member happily reporting his Shields Up results everytime a new beta version of Comodo version was out...LOL this was aboslutely irrelevant. Easy to prove ;D; deactivate your Windows based firewall, assuming you got a router Firewall running, and run the test again. If your router FW is a good one (which is often the case, already with default settings), all your ports are already stealth. Now try the contrary, with any software firewall, and see how "easy" it is to get the same results ;D
Your best firewall, concerning how well your ports are protected from online attacks/intrusions is your router's firewall, that's a fact. I just did the test again a minute ago, with CIS firewall on, and then off, and got the same results in both cases:
Your system has achieved a perfect "TruStealth" rating. Not a single packet — solicited or otherwise — was received from your system as a result of our security probing tests. Your system ignored and refused to reply to repeated Pings (ICMP Echo Requests). From the standpoint of the passing probes of any hacker, this machine does not exist on the Internet. Some questionable personal security systems expose their users by attempting to "counter-probe the prober", thus revealing themselves. But your system wisely remained silent in every way. Very nice.
;D
-
Does it mean that actually if the router firewall is good enough then all Window-firewall no matter what brand is also a junk ? :o
Luckily I do not spend on firewall. ;D
no it doesn't mean that. A Windows based software firewall does many tasks that your router fw won't do, unless you're ready to spend hours trying to configure it. It's not just about ports ;)
-
@Conogo
Please view the excellent video by BestTechie with Bruce Harrison who is a developer at Malwarebytes – the company who created Malwarebytes’ Anti-Malware:
Malwarebytes Developer Interview
http://www.besttechie.net/2008/08/20/malwarebytes-developer-interview <== software firewalls are discussed starting about 8 minutes into the video
If you must have a firewall on XP then PC tools or Outpost are good and Vista has a built in firewall that can be controled with Vista Firewall Control by SphinxSoftware.
-
Well the default Vista Firewall got outbound protection also dont worry Yokenny i did see it.
-
Basically, that's correct. :)
-
Outbound protection : does it mean that my pc data won't go out to another pc/server unless get my permission ?
the only problem is how u give your permission...
-
outbound protection means that no request can go out from your PC unless it's been been explicitly requested and allowed by you (ie the programs you've allowed to,their limits etc...) and nothing else...like a trojan. That's the main purpose, how you control what your programs do when they connect, if you asked them to connect, or if an "accidentally" downloaded intruder is attempting to connect using hundreds of possible means. That's where your firewall outbound protection does its job, depending on how you've tweaked the interface (rules).
Now fortunately firewalls have modes doing much of that on their own, like being able to recognize the applications, and detect if something's wrong: predefined policies and rules, that can still be tweaked, are your friends.
-
Also when u see "2 Ways" its mean Inbound and Outbound. So its recommanded now a day. XP Firewall got only Inbound which is not enought. ;)
-
... ? Mean ? If you use the XP Firewall i can recommand to you to watch the list of the firewall at matousec. http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php So you can choice the one that you feel great for you.
-
... ? Mean ? If you use the XP Firewall i can recommand to you to watch the list of the firewall at matousec. http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php So you can choice the one that you feel great for you.
confirming, that site became the best possible reference for firewall testing out there ;)
-
For me its alway been the best firewall testing. ;D But im still happy with my current windows vista firewall so if i want help for another 1 i will sure to visit this website ;D
-
... ? Mean ? If you use the XP Firewall i can recommand to you to watch the list of the firewall at matousec. http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php So you can choice the one that you feel great for you.
no.. i use comodo firewall...
-
Ok that a 2 Ways. Good. But i hope you read here http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=46737.0 No for make you mad or Comodo mad but well they did bad thing and we are no responsible of it. We are here to say the truth no the false. I also dont wanna lose them so reputation so they shouldnt blame me if they did this nasty thing. Well its not my problem. All know it now i think. ;)
-
not doin their job, according to the link...
-
Well its talk about them so its talk about their product.
Edit : Gotta go bye. Im playing with my game now :D
-
well...if they get any worse, I'm changing firewall...
-
Ok that a 2 Ways. Good. But i hope you read here http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=46737.0 No for make you mad or Comodo mad but well they did bad thing and we are no responsible of it. We are here to say the truth no the false. I also dont wanna lose them so reputation so they shouldnt blame me if they did this nasty thing. Well its not my problem. All know it now i think. ;)
who cares ::) just learn how to use what's good in Comodo products and leave the rest, period.
-
This thread is about Privatefirewall NOT Comodo. :P
-
This thread is about Privatefirewall NOT Comodo. :P
lol that's right, I admit I almost forgot about it ;D
-
just one thing about Shields Up (grc): the result you get there depend at 99,9% on your router and its settings. Not much to do with your Windows based firewall. I had some fun once on Comodo forums about that with another member happily reporting his Shields Up results everytime a new beta version of Comodo version was out...LOL this was aboslutely irrelevant. Easy to prove ;D; deactivate your Windows based firewall, assuming you got a router Firewall running, and run the test again. If your router FW is a good one (which is often the case, already with default settings), all your ports are already stealth. Now try the contrary, with any software firewall, and see how "easy" it is to get the same results ;D
Your best firewall, concerning how well your ports are protected from online attacks/intrusions is your router's firewall, that's a fact. I just did the test again a minute ago, with CIS firewall on, and then off, and got the same results in both cases:
Your system has achieved a perfect "TruStealth" rating. Not a single packet — solicited or otherwise — was received from your system as a result of our security probing tests. Your system ignored and refused to reply to repeated Pings (ICMP Echo Requests). From the standpoint of the passing probes of any hacker, this machine does not exist on the Internet. Some questionable personal security systems expose their users by attempting to "counter-probe the prober", thus revealing themselves. But your system wisely remained silent in every way. Very nice.
;D
Hi, usually it's best to put the router in dmz mode if you want to test a software firewall's packet filtering ability. :)
-
OA started giving me problems so I switched to Privatefirewall on both of my computers.
Privatefirewall is running good without any problems, so far.
OA 4.0.0.15 free & Pro was causing slow opening of folders & occasional freezing on XP sp3.
-
I haven't heard of Private Firewall.
Why should they think about making it free?
Unless no one is willing to buy them.
-
I haven't heard of Private Firewall.
Why should they think about making it free?
Unless no one is willing to buy them.
Why does ALWIL offer a free antivirus?
It's a "carrot" to attract customers to buy other software.
http://www.privacyware.com/personal_firewall.html
-
Got it ;D
-
Pctools firewall plus uses less resources or Private Firewall?
-
Pctools firewall plus uses less resources or Private Firewall?
I'd guess Privatefirewall uses less, its faster.
Privatefirewall isn't buggy like PC Tools firewall. ::)
-
lol Pc Tools firewall got bugs at the first install.
But after the second install it works perfectly on my pc^^
-
I've had Privatefirewall on both of my computers since Christmas.
No problems & very lite.
My old Compaq with XP sp3 seems faster than ever before. :)
My Gateway with 7 64bit is too fast to notice any difference.
Greased lighting with a little extra grease is hard to tell. ;)
The Compaq may be old, she's not slow. ;D
-
Wait was private firewall in the firewall tests ???,I mean the firewall test which was posted a few weeks ago!
-
Do you mean: http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php
If so, Matousec didn't include the latest version of Privatefirewall in their latest round of tests.
Two reasons I don't like Matousec:
1) They only evaluate firewalls by "leak tests".
2) Their tests are lopsided, that is they compare old versions of some firewalls against new versions of others. For example, they used the newest Comodo against Privatefirewall v6, v7 was available but not used. ::)
-
Wow they really don't care if their test are accurate!
-
Here is a good laugh for you, both OA Premium 4.0.0.15 & OA Free 4.0.0.15 were released at the same time, but they tested OA Premium 4.0.0.15 in the latest round with an old OA Free, 3.5.0.14.
OA Premium 4.0.0.15 & OA Free 4.0.0.15 would likely have tied. OA Free 4.0.0.15 would have embarrassed many pay for firewalls.
-
I got it :)
But they are not right doing that people wants a better result but they use old vs newer versions
complicated to guess which one is better
Wow I didn't know that the firewall was that light and that it has all that features :)
-
Until a site comes up with a better way, which tests all aspects of the firewall that is what we have. This site tests leaks, grc.com tests stealth, combine the results of both and you have some sort of representation of your firewall.
So what if it didn't test the latest version, if you have a later version, you would have to assume that it would improve from earlier versions as they surely benefit from the previous tests.
It isn't rocket science, its common sense. I don't care who might be embarrassed or which one is at the top if the heap in the current round of tests, if your firewall is in the top group, ratted excellent that is fine.
Something which isn't tested in the firewalls and that is personal preference as only you can test that. The firewall has to meet your needs and not be a pain in the ass to use, not constantly bugging the user for answers as for the most part users haven't got a clue what the answer is.
I have used the same Firewall in various versions for around 6-7 years, it is like a pair of comfortable shoes now, has it come top during that time yes, is it right now no, so what, has it let me down in all that time NO. There you have real life and not arbitrary testing, is it the best is a subjective question and has to meet the requirements of the user not any test.
If it achieves satisfactory results it doesn't have to be top dog, so long as it meets the users requirements, has a reasonable interface, isn't always bugging the user, then that should be enough.
-
DavidR,
I agree with you, but a comparison test should be an even test with the most up to date versions available.
I'm happy with Privatefirewall, it meets my criteria.
-
Until a site comes up with a better way, which tests all aspects of the firewall that is what we have. This site tests leaks, grc.com tests stealth, combine the results of both and you have some sort of representation of your firewall.
So what if it didn't test the latest version, if you have a later version, you would have to assume that it would improve from earlier versions as they surely benefit from the previous tests.
It isn't rocket science, its common sense. I don't care who might be embarrassed or which one is at the top if the heap in the current round of tests, if your firewall is in the top group, ratted excellent that is fine.
Something which isn't tested in the firewalls and that is personal preference as only you can test that. The firewall has to meet your needs and not be a pain in the ass to use, not constantly bugging the user for answers as for the most part users haven't got a clue what the answer is.
I have used the same Firewall in various versions for around 6-7 years, it is like a pair of comfortable shoes now, has it come top during that time yes, is it right now no, so what, has it let me down in all that time NO. There you have real life and not arbitrary testing, is it the best is a subjective question and has to meet the requirements of the user not any test.
If it achieves satisfactory results it doesn't have to be top dog, so long as it meets the users requirements, has a reasonable interface, isn't always bugging the user, then that should be enough.
True,
I also agree :)
I understand it now,thanks DavidR and rdmaloyjr
-
Do you mean: http://www.matousec.com/projects/proactive-security-challenge/results.php
If so, Matousec didn't include the latest version of Privatefirewall in their latest round of tests.
Two reasons I don't like Matousec:
1) They only evaluate firewalls by "leak tests".
2) Their tests are lopsided, that is they compare old versions of some firewalls against new versions of others. For example, they used the newest Comodo against Privatefirewall v6, v7 was available but not used. ::)
shiw liang & DavidR,
Notice my highlight in red. "Leak tests" are over rated, there is more to firewalls than "leak tests", Vlk & Lukor pointed out this. For some the Windows fw is best if they don't know how to use a fw that requires user input.