I just bought the new Norton personal firewall version 2.0
I would like to now what do ya think about the firewall.Im a resercher for network security and i have evalouted allready....
In a scale of 1-5
Black ice agent -> 3
Esafe Desktop -> 3
McAfee.com Firewall -> 4
McAfee Guard Dog -> 3
And soon Norton Personal Firewall-> ?
->4 very good
So what do ya think?
uhmm... I have a hard time giving you a serious answer after seeing that you rate zonealarm the same as mcafee firewall. Take a look at whats going on in the registry with zonealarm vs. mcafee. Mcafee is MUCH more reliable and secure than zonealarm when used by someone who has the ability to properly configure the ruleset. Norton personal firewall is very good as well, but really just a stripped version of NIS 2.0. Aside from Norton Antivirus (not worth the install), NIS also contains very good ad blocking options not contained in the firewall only version. I think Mcafee firewall (formerly Conseal PC Firewall) and NIS (formerly AtGuard Firewall) are the best ones out there for someone who desires reliable software protection. I give them bolth a 5, with NIS 2.0 (full) having some advantage because it has ad blocking and is windows 2000 compatable.
I totally agree with you if we look at the compability side....it is windows 2000 compatible and they have the grate mighty ad blocking....THATS VERY COOL FOR THOSE ANOYNG POPUPS!!!!!And they have other advantages like intrusion log and sososo.......
Why do i scale them the same??????hhhhhhmmmmm lets se if you curently own the McAfee.com firewall and own a network with NT server or a linux server you are in grate danger to be attack by a smurf or teare drop in the link below i perform such test-------http://suicide.netfarmers.net/
NOTE: IM NOT RESPOSIBLE FOR ANY DAMAGES TO SYSTEM'S!!! THESE PAGE IS USED FOR NETWORK SECURITY TEST AND I DON'T OWNED THE WEBPAGE!!!!
and see for your self that both McAfee and Zone alarm will carsh to the smurf attack or teare drop...Hey is better than dameging your whole system... BUT!!! thats wher my rating came from....You see they both came out the same in stelth mode in port probe, nucking, and other kind of "Hacker and Cracker" technincs.
NOTE THAT NO FIREWALL IS A 100% safe!!!
I MANEGE TO GET AROUND ALMOST EVRY FIREWALL THAT I TESTED ALMOST ALL HAVE THE SAME FLAW OR "BUG"...?????
Now I do agree with you! McAfee and At Guard firewall are better for the advantages and for being compatible.....
VERY IMPORTANT NOTE!!!
I DO NOT PERFORM ANY INLEGAL OPERATION "CRACKING" OR PRIVACY BIOLATION "HACKING" ALL TEST ARE PERFORM IN A LEGAL BASIS MENIG ARE PERFOR WITHIN THE
NETWORK INTERNATIONAL SECURITY RESERCH
LABS!!! "TESTING AREA"
Thank you very much for your opinion!!!
And i hope that nothing that I said or graded has ofended you in any way!!!
If yes I apologize!!!
Looks like you have loot's of potential in Internet security!!!! Im in the look to expand my oganisation we are a group of 7.
If any body interested please e-mail me @:
or post a reply here....We provide free tools and if not familrise with Network Security will provide the esential books for newbies!!!
[This message has been edited by AnEnOnFlUiD (edited 07-03-2000).]
I ran every test on the website and had NO problems at all. I'm not running any firewall software on this box. I have a dialup 56k Inet connection w/ no NIC in the box. (MS lookback adapter installed). After reading the warnings of the tests, I almost backed out. I did shut down the server service before I ran the tests. The grc.com site shows good test results in both shields and ports.
I'm looking for a good software firewall to run with Microsoft Proxy Server 2.0 on an NT 4.0 server w/ SP5. Anyone have any experience with this ?
TODAYS KEY WORD IS WIN 2000!!!!
if you trit on a Windows 98 SE and Windows 2000 the test is like nothing.Moste of these tipe of attack "DOSattacks" are desing for older version like NT server, Workstation,All made in the 95 plataform!!! or Win 98 if you haven't tacke care of your security patches!!! BUT..... they allready have the patches for these kind of burnability,
They even oferit at the website.
In my test linux,NT95 was a victim of the attack.
Remember we all run difernet plataform or "OS" my Network is base in 7 pc..... 4 of theme runing Linux Mandrake 6.5 those where the victim but i just recently upgrade to 7.0 so im good to go "I GUES".........
1 pc runs in a partition of Windows 95 NT server, windows 98 Upgrade , and BEos. The other one runs Windows NT upgraded to 2000 Interface
And my last pc runs in linux SUSE.
No talk about any hardware walls...Thats ok to I guess..
All those u have listed are o.k. for the average user who are not inclind to configure full firewalls.. As for win2000/nt these products come with walls but are not for the average user..You have to have a knowledge of all ports and thier function related to services..Also I see no Conseal in your list which I feel is better than all of them, oh!Ya! only if you can again configure a proper software wall..
Hello again Noir Pouvoir,
We are onit we are currently testing the fallowing Hard weare firewalls:
But untill we don't finish we whont realese the results.
What do you think?
As Conseal Firewall Thats McAfee.com
you see McAfee recently team up with Conseal
so McAfee came out with a new firewall that been on the market for a while now.
Go chequit out you might liket.
Personally i did but im not to much in to McAfee.
it got grate features but ass I posted before it fail in some test----any way----is cool cuse it was made to protect high speed internet users!!!
so they claim in the box!!!heheheeh http://www.McAfee.com
I'm running Win98. Black Ice 1.96 is running great for me. I heard 2.1 is kinda screwed up....Anyway, I'm hoping to upgrade to Win Me in Sept/Oct, hope Black Ice is compatible with it.....(I don't think my version is...)