Firewall for ME

Old question but.......

Which is best FREE firewall for ME?
I was using Sygate Personal Firewall which is now creating problems and no
more updates available(I believe).
ZoneAlarm is no more for ME.

Kerio 2.15 was highly recommended in this NG. I have been using it for years
without any problem.

Dan

"Farhan" wrote in message
...
Old question but.......

Which is best FREE firewall for ME?
I was using Sygate Personal Firewall which is now creating problems and no
more updates available(I believe).
ZoneAlarm is no more for ME.

Still available at :-
http://www.freeware-guide.com/dir/util/firewall.html

Mart


"Dapper Dan" wrote in message
...
Kerio 2.15 was highly recommended in this NG. I have been using it for
years without any problem.

Dan

"Farhan" wrote in message
...
Old question but.......

Which is best FREE firewall for ME?
I was using Sygate Personal Firewall which is now creating problems and
no
more updates available(I believe).
ZoneAlarm is no more for ME.

I use McAfee firewall which comes with AOL which is now totally free.

Also, especially with a high speed internet, be sure to use a router.

"Farhan" wrote in message
...
Old question but.......

Which is best FREE firewall for ME?
I was using Sygate Personal Firewall which is now creating problems and no
more updates available(I believe).
ZoneAlarm is no more for ME.

Another fine alternative is to simply enable ICS. Then depending on one's
particular needs, it's a simple matter to open specific ports; a couple of
nice free utilities help doing that.


"N. Miller" wrote...
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 03:40:01 -0700, Farhan wrote:

Old question but.......

Which is best FREE firewall for ME?
I was using Sygate Personal Firewall which is now creating problems and
no
more updates available(I believe).
ZoneAlarm is no more for ME.

I will concur with Dapper Dan. There is no better PFW than Kerio 2.1.5 for
a
Windows Me computer.

As I understand it enabling ICS, even if just on the one PC, enables NAT
without the need for either a router or a second PC.
--
Mike Maltby



N. Miller wrote:

How is "Internet Connection Sharing" a "fine alternative" to a
Personal Firewall? If you are going to suggest expending money on a
second computer to use as a NAT router, a purpose-built D-Link or
Netgear product is cheaper. Or, if you have a spare computer, run a
Linux-based router application.

Does it really? Of course, not much use when the ICS software is itself a
security risk. I believe that's a recent NT vulnerability?

Anyway, my view is it is better to encourage people to use a software
firewall than encourage them not to, even if it'll be superfluous. Since as
if you encourage people to do without one, for every one who learns there'll
be twenty or fifty or a hundred who hear only that a firewall is
unnecessary. The same way its really hateful to wear a condom when you first
get together with someone you think highly of. Especially if you're only
going to dinner!


Shane

Mike M wrote:
As I understand it enabling ICS, even if just on the one PC, enables
NAT without the need for either a router or a second PC.

How is "Internet Connection Sharing" a "fine alternative" to a
Personal Firewall? If you are going to suggest expending money on a
second computer to use as a NAT router, a purpose-built D-Link or
Netgear product is cheaper. Or, if you have a spare computer, run a
Linux-based router application.

Personally I always try to encourage users to use a router first and then
a firewall as well if they want. It must be eight or nine years since I
used ICS to network 2 PCs running Win 95, I started, I think with Sygate
and then with the release of 98SE used ICS built in to 98SE. I moved to
using a router shortly after I got ADSL in early 2001. I couldn't wait to
dump the green sting ray (referred to by many as the green frog) as I felt
I had so little control with it being a usb device.

I've now got the two XP Pro VMs I wanted, the first with IE6 the second
IE7. It's so nice to be able to get the IE6 VM all OK and then copy the
vhd and create a new vmc and then install IE7 and the patches on that one
whilst still having the IE6 copy for when needed. Tomorrow I'll be able
to get down to testing a new app and see if I want to install it "for
real" or whether to dump it and not bother. BTW I hope you've enabled the
Undo disk feature which is most useful.
--
Mike


Shane wrote:

Does it really? Of course, not much use when the ICS software is
itself a security risk. I believe that's a recent NT vulnerability?

Anyway, my view is it is better to encourage people to use a software
firewall than encourage them not to, even if it'll be superfluous.
Since as if you encourage people to do without one, for every one who
learns there'll be twenty or fifty or a hundred who hear only that a
firewall is unnecessary. The same way its really hateful to wear a
condom when you first get together with someone you think highly of.
Especially if you're only going to dinner!

Well.. I have little choice. I'm on dialup. I recently found a used
router that has a serial port for a modem, but long time prior to that I
discovered that ICS actually produces a nice "stealth" status for my pc and
consequently also for the next pc in the network. Early on I learned that
ICS permits services to negotiate over the internet only if the service is
initiated from the ICS host pc or from another networked pc. ICS never
responds to outside attacks.


"Mike M" wrote..
Personally I always try to encourage users to use a router first and then
a firewall as well if they want. It must be eight or nine years since I
used ICS to network 2 PCs running Win 95, I started, I think with Sygate
and then with the release of 98SE used ICS built in to 98SE. I moved to
using a router shortly after I got ADSL in early 2001.

BTW I hope you've enabled the Undo disk feature which is most useful.


I have, Mike. Though as yet haven't found just *how* useful, ie whether I
should be thankful for it or indifferent (for not having found out yet)!

I certainly appreciate your turning me on to this! I think I shall make one
myself to run IE7 on. Even if I don't use it personally I'm going to need to
know how to get under IE7's bonnet. How do you back them up? I know you've
mentioned this. Just copy them? Zip them? Thinking about imaging them is
making my head hurt in the same way as trying to figure out the value of
using VPC to access DOS from is!

Shane


Mike M wrote:
Personally I always try to encourage users to use a router first and
then a firewall as well if they want. It must be eight or nine years
since I used ICS to network 2 PCs running Win 95, I started, I think
with Sygate and then with the release of 98SE used ICS built in to
98SE. I moved to using a router shortly after I got ADSL in early
2001. I couldn't wait to dump the green sting ray (referred to by
many as the green frog) as I felt I had so little control with it
being a usb device.
I've now got the two XP Pro VMs I wanted, the first with IE6 the
second IE7. It's so nice to be able to get the IE6 VM all OK and
then copy the vhd and create a new vmc and then install IE7 and the
patches on that one whilst still having the IE6 copy for when needed.
Tomorrow I'll be able to get down to testing a new app and see if I
want to install it "for real" or whether to dump it and not bother. BTW I
hope you've enabled the Undo disk feature which is most useful.

Does it really? Of course, not much use when the ICS software is
itself a security risk. I believe that's a recent NT vulnerability?

Anyway, my view is it is better to encourage people to use a software
firewall than encourage them not to, even if it'll be superfluous.
Since as if you encourage people to do without one, for every one who
learns there'll be twenty or fifty or a hundred who hear only that a
firewall is unnecessary. The same way its really hateful to wear a
condom when you first get together with someone you think highly of.
Especially if you're only going to dinner!