Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls - Firewalls

This is a discussion on Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls - Firewalls ; My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I recently bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains a firewall. I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use the Zone Alarm Pro ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 51

Thread: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

  1. Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I recently
    bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains a firewall.
    I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use the Zone Alarm
    Pro firewall.
    I don't use the Win XP firewall because I heard that it's not a good idea to
    have several firewall on at the same time.
    We get internet through a Belkin pre-N wireless router that is supposed to
    have some sort of firewall built in and that one is turned on.
    My computer connects to the router with an ethernet cable and my son's
    computer uses a Belkin N usb wireless adapter. They both have the same
    current setup I describe regarding firewalls.
    Can anyone please advise on whether the Zone Alarm Pro firewall is any
    better than the Norton firewall in my situation?
    Should I renew the Zone Alarm Pro subscription or uninstall it when it
    expires and turn on the Norton firewall?
    Thanks for any advice.



  2. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    Luis Ortega wrote:
    > My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I recently
    > bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains a firewall.
    > I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use the Zone Alarm
    > Pro firewall.
    > I don't use the Win XP firewall because I heard that it's not a good idea to
    > have several firewall on at the same time.
    > We get internet through a Belkin pre-N wireless router that is supposed to
    > have some sort of firewall built in and that one is turned on.
    > My computer connects to the router with an ethernet cable and my son's
    > computer uses a Belkin N usb wireless adapter. They both have the same
    > current setup I describe regarding firewalls.
    > Can anyone please advise on whether the Zone Alarm Pro firewall is any
    > better than the Norton firewall in my situation?
    > Should I renew the Zone Alarm Pro subscription or uninstall it when it
    > expires and turn on the Norton firewall?
    > Thanks for any advice.
    >
    >

    Good luck if you should decide to try and uninstall Norton.

    John.

  3. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    You don't understand.
    I'm not trying to uninstall Norton, I'm wondering whether to renew the Zone
    alarm if Norton already comes with a firewall. I'm interested to know which
    might be the better firewall.
    Does anyone have any relevant advice on this?

    "John" wrote in message
    news:5qqit1F119k12U1@mid.individual.net...
    > Luis Ortega wrote:
    >> My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I
    >> recently bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains a
    >> firewall.
    >> I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use the Zone
    >> Alarm Pro firewall.
    >> I don't use the Win XP firewall because I heard that it's not a good idea
    >> to have several firewall on at the same time.
    >> We get internet through a Belkin pre-N wireless router that is supposed
    >> to have some sort of firewall built in and that one is turned on.
    >> My computer connects to the router with an ethernet cable and my son's
    >> computer uses a Belkin N usb wireless adapter. They both have the same
    >> current setup I describe regarding firewalls.
    >> Can anyone please advise on whether the Zone Alarm Pro firewall is any
    >> better than the Norton firewall in my situation?
    >> Should I renew the Zone Alarm Pro subscription or uninstall it when it
    >> expires and turn on the Norton firewall?
    >> Thanks for any advice.

    > Good luck if you should decide to try and uninstall Norton.
    >
    > John.




  4. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 11:31:59 GMT, "Luis Ortega"
    wrote:

    >My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I recently
    >bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains a firewall.
    >I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use the Zone Alarm
    >Pro firewall.
    >I don't use the Win XP firewall because I heard that it's not a good idea to
    >have several firewall on at the same time.
    >We get internet through a Belkin pre-N wireless router that is supposed to
    >have some sort of firewall built in and that one is turned on.
    >My computer connects to the router with an ethernet cable and my son's
    >computer uses a Belkin N usb wireless adapter. They both have the same
    >current setup I describe regarding firewalls.
    >Can anyone please advise on whether the Zone Alarm Pro firewall is any
    >better than the Norton firewall in my situation?
    >Should I renew the Zone Alarm Pro subscription or uninstall it when it
    >expires and turn on the Norton firewall?
    >Thanks for any advice.
    >


    Many a computer * screwup * is caused by Norton .

  5. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    Hi Luis,
    I quit reading responses when the zealots crawled out of the woodwork so
    please forgive me if I'm repeating someone's input here:

    IMO, and that of many other people I know, either of the firewalls you
    mention are good ones.
    Personally, I would base my opinion on which one to use based on how
    they "feel" to me; ease of use, setting blocks/unblocks, controlling
    when/how often it interrupts me settings, relevancy of log data, etc..

    I have a NAT DSL router and ZoneAlarm. I'm quite happy with them. I also
    have Norton SystemWorks which is sans a firewall but my ISP is offering the
    NIS pkg, which includes a firewall, so I just may take a look at Norton's
    firewall but my choices will be based on how it fits to my own use and
    perceptions.

    The XP firewall is "decent" but only checks incoming traffic, not outgoing,
    so if you had something that was calling home with your account passwords,
    it would miss it. It's real use is so that you CAN have a firewall when you
    first hit the internet and until you get all of your updates and other
    protection apps into place and updated. I seldom have to rebuild my system
    so I've only used it once or twice, but it does give basic protection but
    that's about all.

    You're also correct in that having two software firewalls working at the
    same time is a no-no. They will step on each other's resources even if they
    seem to work together. Many firewalls won't even install until you disable
    any other one you have working. Some even make you actually Remove the
    other firewall before they'll install and XP also has a firewall monitor
    that'll complain to you.

    So, I'd say use the one that feels right to you based on the two you
    indicated. They both have excellent reputations for ability and
    dependability.
    As for the crap about removing Norton, it boils down to being able to
    RTFM; if you can read and follow directions it's a snap. I've done it
    several times on my own machines and that of clients, for various reasons.

    HTH

    Pop`


    Luis Ortega wrote:
    > My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I
    > recently bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains
    > a firewall. I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use
    > the Zone
    > Alarm Pro firewall.
    > I don't use the Win XP firewall because I heard that it's not a good
    > idea to have several firewall on at the same time.
    > We get internet through a Belkin pre-N wireless router that is
    > supposed to have some sort of firewall built in and that one is
    > turned on. My computer connects to the router with an ethernet cable and
    > my son's
    > computer uses a Belkin N usb wireless adapter. They both have the same
    > current setup I describe regarding firewalls.
    > Can anyone please advise on whether the Zone Alarm Pro firewall is any
    > better than the Norton firewall in my situation?
    > Should I renew the Zone Alarm Pro subscription or uninstall it when it
    > expires and turn on the Norton firewall?
    > Thanks for any advice.





  6. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    Luis Ortega wrote:
    > My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I recently
    > bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains a firewall.
    > I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use the Zone Alarm
    > Pro firewall.
    > I don't use the Win XP firewall because I heard that it's not a good idea to
    > have several firewall on at the same time.
    > We get internet through a Belkin pre-N wireless router that is supposed to
    > have some sort of firewall built in and that one is turned on.
    > My computer connects to the router with an ethernet cable and my son's
    > computer uses a Belkin N usb wireless adapter. They both have the same
    > current setup I describe regarding firewalls.
    > Can anyone please advise on whether the Zone Alarm Pro firewall is any
    > better than the Norton firewall in my situation?
    > Should I renew the Zone Alarm Pro subscription or uninstall it when it
    > expires and turn on the Norton firewall?
    > Thanks for any advice.



    Alt.comp.anti-virus or alt.comp.virus are better places to ask your
    question. Many of the people in those two groups are unusually
    knowledgeable about this subject. I will forewarn you however that (the
    last time I was there at least) Norton home use products were not at the
    top of their recommended lists.

    John

  7. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    On Nov 24, 8:31 pm, "Luis Ortega" wrote:
    > My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I recently
    > bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains a firewall.
    > I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use the Zone Alarm
    > Pro firewall.
    > I don't use the Win XP firewall because I heard that it's not a good idea to
    > have several firewall on at the same time.


    It is actually also a bad idea to install more then one software
    firewall on a computer. The software firewall to do its "job" deeply
    integrates/messes with the Windows system. In general, the only way to
    get properly rid of an installed (single) software firewall on a
    Windows system is to reinstall the system. Otherwise you may see all
    kinds of issues after the uninstallation plus usually not everything
    is gone after the standard deinstallation from the software wizard.
    That's why you have to download additional tools from Symantec or
    others only to get rid of the rest.

    Now make the math: you have already installed two firewalls on your
    computer. (The Windows XP firewall is part of the OS that's why it
    does not cause issues here). Twice you have messed up the system with
    an installation of a software firewall. Both try to hook into the
    system to do their job and to make them fixed into the system so that
    other malware does not accidentally removes the firewall software.

    It is even now impossible to say whether any of those two firewalls
    operates correctly if turned on. Norton may well have removed some of
    the hooks which ZoneAlarm installed which ZoneAlarm did not notice. Or
    well, maybe ZoneAlarm noticed some of those changes and reverted them
    back removing Norton hooks...

    Honestly, I would recommend to reinstall Windows from scratch and
    learn a little about computer security and how to keep your computer
    secure by what you DO instead of what you INSTALL. It is not so
    complicated and still human beings are more intelligent than some
    piece of software. It is possible to run a computer without any
    firewall running and without getting infected with malware. But
    obviously, this last statement does not sell good that's why you find
    a lot of opposite (well sponsored) statements.

    At the current stage I doubt you will be able to get any of those
    firewalls removed from your system without damage to the system...

    Gerald

  8. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    On Nov 25, 12:49 am, "Luis Ortega" wrote:
    > Thanks. My understanding of router firewalls is that they only block
    > incoming traffic and if there is some malware on the system then outgoing
    > stuff is not blocked. Is that correct?


    Correct. But software firewalls only detect outgoing traffic if the
    malware is so nice/dumb to be detected. And even if it is detected and
    something is blocked it does not mean it does not send anything out
    because there are various ways to send something out even with a
    firewall installed (through your browser, through DNS, etc. all things
    you use and need to browse the internet for instance.)

    It would be more effective for your overall security if you have
    learned how to prevent malware on your computer in the first place.
    And this mostly depends on what you do and not with some security
    software you install.

    Gerald

  9. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 09:19:53 -0700, Ken Blake, MVP wrote:
    >
    > However many knowledgeable people feel that monitoring outbound
    > traffic adds little or nothing to the effectiveness of the firewall.


    Including:
    Jesper M. Johansson, Ph.D., CISSP, MCSE, MCP+I
    Security Program Manager
    Microsoft Corporation
    http://msinfluentials.com/blogs/jesp...l-is-free.aspx

    Steve Riley,
    a senior security strategist in the Microsoft Trustworthy Computing Group
    and contributing editor for TechNet Magazine, jets around the world to
    speak at conferences and spend time with customers to help them get and
    stay secure.
    http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tec...s/default.aspx
    Scroll down to:
    "Myth: Host-Based Firewalls Must Filter Outbound Traffic to be Safe."

    Steve Gibson,
    Firewall LeakTesting.
    http://www.grc.com/sn/SN-105.htm

    Excerpts:
    Leo Laporte: "So the leaktest is kind of pointless."
    Steve Gibson: "Well,yes,...
    Leo: "So are you saying that there's no point in doing a leaktest anymore?"
    Steve: "Well, it's why I have not taken the trouble to update mine, because
    you..."
    Leo: "You can't test enough".
    Steve: "Well, yeah.
    Leo: "Right. Very interesting stuff. I guess that - my sense is, if you
    can't test for leaks, a software-based firewall is kind of essentially
    worthless."

    > I'm personally not convinced that either point of view is absolutely
    > right, but as a precaution, I use the free ZA in addition to what my
    > router does. My guess is that any extra protection I'm adding is
    > slight, but on the other hand, the hit on performance by having it
    > running appears to be slight too.
    >


    Maker of PFW,
    A realistic assessment with respect to 3rd party PFW from a respectable
    software manufacturer 2007-08-07.
    http://www.matousec.com/projects/win...ewalls-ratings

    Sunbelt Software - the vendor of Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall
    Excerpts:

    [quote]
    ....we have some reservations about personal firewall "leak testing" in
    general. While we appreciate and support the unique value of independent
    security testing, we are admittedly skeptical as to just how meaningful
    these leak tests really are, especially as they reflect real-world
    environments.

    The key assumption of "leak testing" -- namely, that it is somehow useful
    to measure the outbound protection provided by personal firewalls in cases
    where malware has already executed on the test box -- strikes us as a
    questionable basis on which to build a security assessment. Today's malware
    is so malicious and cleverly designed that it is often safest to regard PCs
    as so thoroughly compromised that nothing on the box can be trusted once
    the malware executes. In short, "leak testing" starts after the game is
    already lost, as the malware has already gotten past the inbound firewall
    protection.

    Moreover, "leak testing" is predicated on the further assumption that
    personal firewalls should warn users about outbound connections even when
    the involved code components are not demonstrably malicious or suspicious
    (as is the case with the simulator programs used for "leak testing"). In
    fact, this kind of program design risks pop-up fatigue in users,
    effectively lowering the overall security of the system -- the reason
    developers are increasingly shunning this design for security applications.
    [unquote]

    'nuff said
    --
    Security is a process not a product.
    (Bruce Schneier)

  10. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 14:57:44 -0800 (PST), Gerald Vogt wrote:
    >
    > Honestly, I would recommend to reinstall Windows from scratch and
    > learn a little about computer security and how to keep your computer
    > secure by what you DO instead of what you INSTALL.


    Hear, hear!!!!

    > It is not so complicated and still human beings are more intelligent than some
    > piece of software.


    Precisely, education is the key!

    > It is possible to run a computer without any firewall running and without
    > getting infected with malware.


    Hear, hear!!!

    > But obviously, this last statement does not sell good that's why you find a lot
    > of opposite (well sponsored) statements.


    Also referred to: 'Blinded by advertisement'

    > At the current stage I doubt you will be able to get any of those
    > firewalls removed from your system without damage to the system...


    Agree, he won't!
    --
    Security is a process not a product.
    (Bruce Schneier)

  11. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 11:31:59 GMT, Luis Ortega wrote:

    > My Zone Alarm Pro firewall subscription expires in a few days and I recently
    > bought a Norton Internet Security 2008 package that contains a firewall.
    > I currently have the Norton firewall turned off and just use the Zone Alarm
    > Pro firewall.


    1.) http://zonealarm.donhoover.net/uninstall.html

    2.) A number of experts agree that the retail AV version of McAfee, Norton
    and Trend Micro has become cumbersome and bloated for the average user.
    The retail version of Norton can play havoc with your pc. Uninstall it
    using Norton's own uninstall tool
    http://service1.symantec.com/SUPPORT...05033108162039
    and get a refund
    As suggested on the site, you may wish to print out the directions before
    proceeding.
    Or
    http://www.majorgeeks.com/Norton_Rem...NRT_d4749.html

    While Norton's removal tool usually gets the job done, you may also want to
    go to:
    http://www.snapfiles.com/get/winsockxpfix.html
    and download a copy of winsockxpfix just in case. Rarely, the removal of
    NIS breakes the networking components in XP to the point where internet
    access is impossible. This little utility will fix it back up.

    If the Norton removal tool doesn't work satisfactory use this:
    Revo Uninstaller Freeware - Remove unwanted programs and traces easily
    http://www.revouninstaller.com/
    and/or
    RegSeeker
    http://www.hoverdesk.net/freeware.htm
    RegSeeker will remove all associated detritus (registry keys,files and
    folders) from any application. I found this application user friendly and
    very effective but suggest *not* to use the 'Clean the Registry' option.
    Click onto 'Find in registry' and in the 'Search for' box type *Norton*;
    The pertinent registry keys can then be safely deleted (just in case,
    ensure that the 'Backup before deletion' is checked). Repeat the task by
    typing in the Search for' box *Symantec*. You can then go on search and
    remove associated files as well.
    Then use NTREGOPT to compact the registry; Follow instructions.
    http://www.larshederer.homepage.t-online.de/erunt

    > I don't use the Win XP firewall because I heard that it's not a good idea to
    > have several firewall on at the same time.


    That's correct, steer way from any PFW aka Phoney-Baloney ware and/or
    Illussion ware.
    In conjunction with WinXP SP2 Firewall use:
    Seconfig XP 1.0
    http://seconfig.sytes.net/
    (http://www.softpedia.com/progDownloa...oad-39707.html)
    Seconfig XP is able configure Windows not to use TCP/IP as transport
    protocol for NetBIOS, SMB and RPC, thus leaving TCP/UDP ports 135, 137-139
    and 445 (the most exploited Windows networking weak point) closed.)
    OR
    Configuring NT-services much more secure.
    http://www.ntsvcfg.de/ntsvcfg_eng.html

    > We get internet through a Belkin pre-N wireless router that is supposed to
    > have some sort of firewall built in and that one is turned on.
    > My computer connects to the router with an ethernet cable and my son's
    > computer uses a Belkin N usb wireless adapter. They both have the same
    > current setup I describe regarding firewalls.
    > Can anyone please advise on whether the Zone Alarm Pro firewall is any
    > better than the Norton firewall in my situation?


    I'd recomment neither.

    > Should I renew the Zone Alarm Pro subscription or uninstall it when it
    > expires and turn on the Norton firewall?


    No!

    Consider this:
    1. Do not work as administrator, use limtited user account (LUA) for
    day-to-day work.
    2. Keep your system (and all software on it) patched/updated.
    3. Review use of IE and OE.
    4. Don't expose services to public networks.
    5. For inspirational reading go to:
    http://home20.inet.tele.dk/b_nice/index.htm

    Good luck
    --
    Security is a process not a product.
    (Bruce Schneier)

  12. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    Gerald Vogt wrote:
    > On Nov 24, 8:31 pm, "Luis Ortega" wrote:

    ....
    >
    > It is actually also a bad idea to install more then one software
    > firewall on a computer.


    No, it's a bad idea to RUN more than one firewall at a time. Have fun
    removing XP's firewall if that's how you operate.

    The software firewall to do its "job" deeply
    > integrates/messes with the Windows system.


    Actually, what it does is sit and monitor what goes in/out (sometimes only
    in), compare it against its rules, and send messages appropriately to/from
    the system. It does not "integrate" into the OS.

    In general, the only way to
    > get properly rid of an installed (single) software firewall on a
    > Windows system is to reinstall the system.


    Blatantly untrue and misinformed information here. It occurs to me that you
    are doing no more than parroting what you think you have read and have
    little to no experience in such matters. OR, you refuse RTFM and can not,
    will not do things correctly. All the good ones come with perfectly
    readable, understandable, concise information and instructions, including
    removal instructions. Failing that, you can always go online to their site
    and get the information again should you lose track of it.

    Otherwise you may see all
    > kinds of issues after the uninstallation plus usually not everything
    > is gone after the standard deinstallation from the software wizard.


    Not "everything" is "gone" after almost ANY uninstall of almost ANY
    software. There are some good and some not so good reasons for that but
    I'll not go into them because I can feel the hardness of your skull from
    here.

    > That's why you have to download additional tools from Symantec or
    > others only to get rid of the rest.


    But that should be obviously clear to anyone but those who refuse to read
    anything and instead barge in like a bull in a china shop, and expect
    everything to be oh so good for them. Generally very lazy people, plus
    those with no actual experience but who love to bitch and carp like any good
    bass turd. Ignorance is bliss for them, but not for long.
    >
    > Now make the math: you have already installed two firewalls on your
    > computer. (The Windows XP firewall is part of the OS that's why it
    > does not cause issues here).


    That's not what you said earlier, and it's not correct. You have little to
    no knowledge of the SP firewall and/or other software firewalls and probably
    even less on hardware firewalls.

    Twice you have messed up the system with
    > an installation of a software firewall. Both try to hook into the
    > system to do their job and to make them fixed into the system so that
    > other malware does not accidentally removes the firewall software.


    Patently untrue. Your misinformation is outdone only by your ignorance of
    reality. Please adjust your brain.
    >
    > It is even now impossible to say whether any of those two firewalls
    > operates correctly if turned on. Norton may well have removed some of
    > the hooks which ZoneAlarm installed which ZoneAlarm did not notice. Or
    > well, maybe ZoneAlarm noticed some of those changes and reverted them
    > back removing Norton hooks...


    Again you have no idea what you're talking about but love the little
    buzzwords you found somewhere and are trying to parrot here.
    >
    > Honestly, I would recommend to reinstall Windows from scratch


    Completely silly advice and totally unnecessary.

    and
    > learn a little about computer security and how to keep your computer
    > secure by what you DO instead of what you INSTALL. It is not so
    > complicated and still human beings are more intelligent than some
    > piece of software. It is possible to run a computer without any
    > firewall running and without getting infected with malware. But
    > obviously, this last statement does not sell good that's why you find
    > a lot of opposite (well sponsored) statements.


    Wow, that's so full of misinformed content and reasoning that even your
    attempt at rationalizing failed to anyone with even a modest idea of the
    reality of this situation.

    >
    > At the current stage I doubt you will be able to get any of those
    > firewalls removed from your system without damage to the system...


    It's very obvious that what you think is irrelevant to anything, probably in
    most of your life in fact, not just this one circumstance. First you have
    to learn to recognize reality, then you need to get some education about
    things you wish to profess, acquire a few interpersonal skills, and then
    gain some experience. Then you might be close to getting ready to respond
    to the OP's question, which you have not answered clearly.

    Thanks for the entertainment; I needed the break. But I meant what I said
    here; you really aren't ready to respond to questions on newsgroups. Quit
    being a parrot and face reality; only then will you actually understand the
    pros and cons of what you've been attempting to make others think you know.



    >
    > Gerald





  13. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    Whaaat? Sober up!

    Gerald Vogt wrote:
    > On Nov 25, 12:49 am, "Luis Ortega" wrote:
    >> Thanks. My understanding of router firewalls is that they only block
    >> incoming traffic and if there is some malware on the system then
    >> outgoing stuff is not blocked. Is that correct?

    >
    > Correct. But software firewalls only detect outgoing traffic if the
    > malware is so nice/dumb to be detected. And even if it is detected and
    > something is blocked it does not mean it does not send anything out
    > because there are various ways to send something out even with a
    > firewall installed (through your browser, through DNS, etc. all things
    > you use and need to browse the internet for instance.)
    >
    > It would be more effective for your overall security if you have
    > learned how to prevent malware on your computer in the first place.
    > And this mostly depends on what you do and not with some security
    > software you install.
    >
    > Gerald





  14. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    On Nov 25, 10:35 am, "Poprivet" wrote:
    > Whaaat? Sober up!


    Good argument. Very convincing...

    Gerald

  15. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    On Nov 25, 10:34 am, "Poprivet" wrote:
    > Gerald Vogt wrote:
    > > On Nov 24, 8:31 pm, "Luis Ortega" wrote:

    > ...
    >
    > > It is actually also a bad idea to install more then one software
    > > firewall on a computer.

    >
    > No, it's a bad idea to RUN more than one firewall at a time. Have fun
    > removing XP's firewall if that's how you operate.


    Why do you want to remove the XP firewall? Installing more then one
    (i.e. two or more) software firewall on a computer (i.e. in addition
    to the XP firewall) is not really useful.

    > The software firewall to do its "job" deeply
    >
    > > integrates/messes with the Windows system.

    >
    > Actually, what it does is sit and monitor what goes in/out (sometimes only
    > in), compare it against its rules, and send messages appropriately to/from
    > the system. It does not "integrate" into the OS.


    Exactly. It does not integrate. That's why it is so difficult to
    uninstall that stuff afterwards???

    A software firewall wants to provide security. For that it must
    establish itself somewhere deep in the OS to prevent evasion or the
    ability to turn it off quickly.

    > In general, the only way to
    >
    > > get properly rid of an installed (single) software firewall on a
    > > Windows system is to reinstall the system.

    >
    > Blatantly untrue and misinformed information here. It occurs to me that you


    Why exactly do you need additional tools available from Symantec to
    uninstall Norton completely from your computer?? Is that untrue?

    > are doing no more than parroting what you think you have read and have
    > little to no experience in such matters. OR, you refuse RTFM and can not,
    > will not do things correctly. All the good ones come with perfectly
    > readable, understandable, concise information and instructions, including
    > removal instructions. Failing that, you can always go online to their site
    > and get the information again should you lose track of it.


    There is an uninstaller available. That does something but not
    everything. Why again does it happen to so many people that there
    networking still does not work correctly after they have uninstalled
    ZoneAlarm? The stupid uninstaller forgot to remove the proxy setting
    in the internet settings... Hic. It was just not built to be
    uninstalled.

    > Otherwise you may see all
    >
    > > kinds of issues after the uninstallation plus usually not everything
    > > is gone after the standard deinstallation from the software wizard.

    >
    > Not "everything" is "gone" after almost ANY uninstall of almost ANY
    > software. There are some good and some not so good reasons for that but
    > I'll not go into them because I can feel the hardness of your skull from
    > here.


    O.K. What was exactly the good reasons why some uninstallers forgot to
    remove the proxy setting in the internet options which prevented
    people to use the internet after uninstallation?

    > > Now make the math: you have already installed two firewalls on your
    > > computer. (The Windows XP firewall is part of the OS that's why it
    > > does not cause issues here).

    >
    > That's not what you said earlier, and it's not correct. You have little to
    > no knowledge of the SP firewall and/or other software firewalls and probably
    > even less on hardware firewalls.


    What is your problem? Do you have anything else to say except
    personal insults?

    > Twice you have messed up the system with
    >
    > > an installation of a software firewall. Both try to hook into the
    > > system to do their job and to make them fixed into the system so that
    > > other malware does not accidentally removes the firewall software.

    >
    > Patently untrue. Your misinformation is outdone only by your ignorance of
    > reality. Please adjust your brain.


    If it does not fix itself deeply in the OS as they do they can
    obviously very easily circumvented.

    > > It is even now impossible to say whether any of those two firewalls
    > > operates correctly if turned on. Norton may well have removed some of
    > > the hooks which ZoneAlarm installed which ZoneAlarm did not notice. Or
    > > well, maybe ZoneAlarm noticed some of those changes and reverted them
    > > back removing Norton hooks...

    >
    > Again you have no idea what you're talking about but love the little
    > buzzwords you found somewhere and are trying to parrot here.


    Do you have any arguments except personal insults?

    > > learn a little about computer security and how to keep your computer
    > > secure by what you DO instead of what you INSTALL. It is not so
    > > complicated and still human beings are more intelligent than some
    > > piece of software. It is possible to run a computer without any
    > > firewall running and without getting infected with malware. But
    > > obviously, this last statement does not sell good that's why you find
    > > a lot of opposite (well sponsored) statements.

    >
    > Wow, that's so full of misinformed content and reasoning that even your
    > attempt at rationalizing failed to anyone with even a modest idea of the
    > reality of this situation.


    No argument. Personal insult. What are you trying to say:

    * A software is more intelligent than a human being?

    * It is more effective to use some security software then to learn
    something about security and to be careful while in the internet?

    * It is not possible to run a computer securely connected to the
    internet without any antivirus and firewall?

    ....

    > > At the current stage I doubt you will be able to get any of those
    > > firewalls removed from your system without damage to the system...

    >
    > It's very obvious that what you think is irrelevant to anything, probably in
    > most of your life in fact, not just this one circumstance. First you have
    > to learn to recognize reality, then you need to get some education about
    > things you wish to profess, acquire a few interpersonal skills, and then
    > gain some experience. Then you might be close to getting ready to respond
    > to the OP's question, which you have not answered clearly.


    The amount of personal insults and the lack of argument in your post
    makes me thinking your lack a few interpersonal skills and some
    experience.

    > Thanks for the entertainment; I needed the break. But I meant what I said
    > here; you really aren't ready to respond to questions on newsgroups. Quit
    > being a parrot and face reality; only then will you actually understand the
    > pros and cons of what you've been attempting to make others think you know.


    You are the parrot here. You just write what everybody else repeats
    all the timing withing thinking.

    "You must install AV. You must install PFW."

    That of course is not entertaining but boring.

    Face reality. It is possible without AV and with PFW.

    Gerald

  16. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls


    "Gerald Vogt" wrote in message
    news:1e07da14-2fc4-452d-a98c-
    > The amount of personal insults and the lack of argument in your post
    > makes me thinking your lack a few interpersonal skills and some
    > experience.
    >
    >> Thanks for the entertainment; I needed the break. But I meant what I
    >> said
    >> here; you really aren't ready to respond to questions on newsgroups.
    >> Quit
    >> being a parrot and face reality; only then will you actually understand
    >> the
    >> pros and cons of what you've been attempting to make others think you
    >> know.

    >
    > You are the parrot here. You just write what everybody else repeats
    > all the timing withing thinking.
    >
    > Face reality. It is possible without AV and with PFW.
    >
    > Gerald


    Please, there is no need for you guys to get into a flame war over my post.
    I understand that you are trying to be helpful, but I have to disagree with
    you on the points that you have to reinstall windows to uninstall security
    software or that running a windows system without av or pfw is a good idea.
    I appreciate all the advice and thank everyone for their help.



  17. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    In comp.security.firewalls Poprivet wrote:
    > Gerald Vogt wrote:
    >> On Nov 25, 12:49 am, "Luis Ortega" wrote:
    >>> Thanks. My understanding of router firewalls is that they only block
    >>> incoming traffic and if there is some malware on the system then
    >>> outgoing stuff is not blocked. Is that correct?

    >>
    >> Correct. But software firewalls only detect outgoing traffic if the
    >> malware is so nice/dumb to be detected. And even if it is detected
    >> and something is blocked it does not mean it does not send anything
    >> out because there are various ways to send something out even with a
    >> firewall installed (through your browser, through DNS, etc. all
    >> things you use and need to browse the internet for instance.)
    >>
    >> It would be more effective for your overall security if you have
    >> learned how to prevent malware on your computer in the first place.
    >> And this mostly depends on what you do and not with some security
    >> software you install.

    >
    > Whaaat? Sober up!


    Unlike yourself Gerald knows what he's talking about. It's utterly
    pointless to try and confine malware once it's already running on a
    system (even more if the user has admin privileges). The only reasonable
    way to deal with malware is to prevent it from being run in the first
    place. That's what AV software or Windows' System Restriction Policies
    are doing. And what Personal Firewalls fail to do.

    Why don't you try getting a clue instead of making a fool of yourself?

    cu
    59cobalt
    --
    "If a software developer ever believes a rootkit is a necessary part of
    their architecture they should go back and re-architect their solution."
    --Mark Russinovich

  18. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    Luis Ortega wrote:
    > "Gerald Vogt" wrote in message
    > news:1e07da14-2fc4-452d-a98c-
    >> The amount of personal insults and the lack of argument in your post
    >> makes me thinking your lack a few interpersonal skills and some
    >> experience.
    >>
    >>> Thanks for the entertainment; I needed the break. But I meant what
    >>> I said
    >>> here; you really aren't ready to respond to questions on newsgroups.
    >>> Quit
    >>> being a parrot and face reality; only then will you actually
    >>> understand the
    >>> pros and cons of what you've been attempting to make others think
    >>> you know.

    >>
    >> You are the parrot here. You just write what everybody else repeats
    >> all the timing withing thinking.
    >>
    >> Face reality. It is possible without AV and with PFW.
    >>
    >> Gerald

    >
    > Please, there is no need for you guys to get into a flame war over my
    > post. I understand that you are trying to be helpful, but I have to
    > disagree with you on the points that you have to reinstall windows to
    > uninstall security software or that running a windows system without
    > av or pfw is a good idea. I appreciate all the advice and thank
    > everyone for their help.


    No flame war intended, Luis. I've apologized and responded to him that if
    he wishes to debate amicably that's fine with me. I was off target and
    admit it. See my response if you're curious. We all have those "bad"
    days I guess.

    Regards,

    Pop`



  19. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    "Luis Ortega" wrote in
    news:rKX1j.43682$T8.871@newsfe5-win.ntli.net:

    > Thanks. My understanding of router firewalls is that they only block
    > incoming traffic and if there is some malware on the system then
    > outgoing stuff is not blocked. Is that correct?
    >
    >


    If you've got malware on your system you're already done, cooked, finished,
    hacked, and compomised. The ONLY serious remedy at that point is to flatten
    your system and rebuild it.

    Software firewalls are garbage, pure and simple. If it makes you feel
    better though, use Windows native free firewall.

    Do use a NAT router and hardware firewall. You can get these for $100.00 or
    so.

    See: http://www.microsoft.com/technet/com...mt/sm0504.mspx

    and http://samspade.org/d/firewalls.html

    Good luck!


    ChronJob
    _____________________________________
    "-When you have to shoot, shoot, don't talk."

  20. Re: Norton vs Zone Alarm firewalls

    Luis Ortega wrote:
    > Can anyone please advise on whether the Zone Alarm Pro firewall is any
    > better than the Norton firewall in my situation?


    They both exactly have the same type of "quality" - the runs.

    Yours,
    VB.
    --
    The file name of an indirect node file is the string "iNode" immediately
    followed by the link reference converted to decimal text, with no leading
    zeroes. For example, an indirect node file with link reference 123 would
    have the name "iNode123". - HFS Plus Volume Format, MacOS X

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast