Ditto.
The MS firewall is the only one that plays nice without disrupting your
entire system with nagging notices.
As somebody stated earlier, a hardware firewall/router is for keeping
sniffers off your port, while a software "firewall" is really a real-time
monitor of filth-ware activity. Never understood the value of a piece of
code running on windows that conducts SPI. Sticking your bare ass out on the
net (assigning your computer a public IP address), software "firewall" or
not, is a bad idea. You always want to NAT.
From: Thane Sherrington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: The Hardware List <[email protected]>
To: The Hardware List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [H] SW Firewall..Yea or Nay?
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2007 05:56:36 -0300
At 10:10 PM 02/07/2007, DHSinclair wrote:
Should I put a sw-based Firewall on each client prior to
re-implementing broadband? I have 2 candidates that
come highly rated from wilderssecurity-dot-com.
Use the XP SP2 Firewall and a hardware router. If you are committed to a
software firewall, I'd read this site:
http://www.matousec.com/projects/windows-personal-firewall-analysis/leak-tests-results.php
And be prepared for a life of incessant popups asking you if you want to
allow some program to access the net followed (in most cases) by the
firewall losing its mind and shutting down your net access completely.
I've yet to see a software firewall that doesn't make one's life hell.
T
_________________________________________________________________
Local listings, incredible imagery, and driving directions - all in one
place! http://maps.live.com/?wip=69&FORM=MGAC01
