Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent? - Firewalls

This is a discussion on Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent? - Firewalls ; As a condition for accessing my employer's network from home, I had to have approved anti-virus and firewall apps installed on my home PCs. I'm running Windows XP Pro SP3 on all my home machines. They gave out copies of ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

  1. Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

    As a condition for accessing my employer's network from home, I had to
    have approved anti-virus and firewall apps installed on my home PCs.

    I'm running Windows XP Pro SP3 on all my home machines.

    They gave out copies of Symantec AntiVirus and Symantec Protection
    Agent, but I'm changing jobs and the SPA wants to talk to an update
    server on my current employer's network from time to time and I won't
    have access to it any more.

    Both SAV and SPA are rather intrusive and resource intensive, but I
    like SPA's ability to selectively prevent apps from making outbound
    network connections, so I'd like to have a replacement that has that
    feature. Cheap (or free) would be a nice feature too.

    Any suggestions for a software firewall with the ability to
    selectively block outbound connection attempts?


    --
    Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com

  2. Re: Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

    Bert Hyman wrote:
    > As a condition for accessing my employer's network from home, I had to
    > have approved anti-virus and firewall apps installed on my home PCs.


    Sincere condolences.

    > They gave out copies of Symantec AntiVirus and Symantec Protection
    > Agent


    OMN! One of the worst.

    > Both SAV and SPA are rather intrusive and resource intensive, but I
    > like SPA's ability to selectively prevent apps from making outbound
    > network connections, so I'd like to have a replacement that has that
    > feature.


    I hope, this is more a personal sexual preference or something like
    that, because "preventing applications from making outbound network
    connections" is not helpful for security.

    > Any suggestions for a software firewall with the ability to
    > selectively block outbound connection attempts?


    Better try to configure them correctly.

    Yours,
    VB.
    --
    Bitte beachten Sie auch die Rückseite dieses Schreibens!

  3. Re: Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

    In news:48f02aca@news.uni-ulm.de Volker Birk wrote:

    > Bert Hyman wrote:
    >
    >> Both SAV and SPA are rather intrusive and resource intensive, but I
    >> like SPA's ability to selectively prevent apps from making outbound
    >> network connections, so I'd like to have a replacement that has that
    >> feature.

    >
    > I hope, this is more a personal sexual preference or something like
    > that, because "preventing applications from making outbound network
    > connections" is not helpful for security.


    It's helpful for my sense of well being and privacy.

    >> Any suggestions for a software firewall with the ability to
    >> selectively block outbound connection attempts?

    >
    > Better try to configure them correctly.


    Configure what properly?

    --
    Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

  4. Re: Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

    Volker Birk writes:

    > Bert Hyman wrote:
    >> As a condition for accessing my employer's network from home, I had to
    >> have approved anti-virus and firewall apps installed on my home PCs.

    >
    > Sincere condolences.
    >
    >> They gave out copies of Symantec AntiVirus and Symantec Protection
    >> Agent

    >
    > OMN! One of the worst.



    Please cite to back up this assertion.

    Symantec's AV engine did fine in these two latest tests, and the
    corporate product marketed under Symantec is among the least annoying
    such products I've encountered. Norton Antivirus on the other hand is
    among the most annoying.

    http://www.av-comparatives.org/seite...se_2008_08.php

    --
    Todd H.
    http://www.toddh.net/

  5. Re: Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

    Bert Hyman wrote:
    > In news:48f02aca@news.uni-ulm.de Volker Birk wrote:
    >> Bert Hyman wrote:
    >>> Both SAV and SPA are rather intrusive and resource intensive, but I
    >>> like SPA's ability to selectively prevent apps from making outbound
    >>> network connections, so I'd like to have a replacement that has that
    >>> feature.

    >>
    >> I hope, this is more a personal sexual preference or something like
    >> that, because "preventing applications from making outbound network
    >> connections" is not helpful for security.

    >
    > It's helpful for my sense of well being and privacy.


    Perhaps. Unfortunately it's a lot less helpful for your actual
    well-being and privacy.

    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

  6. Re: Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

    In news:gcqv91U6qiL1@news.in-ulm.de Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers
    wrote:

    > Bert Hyman wrote:
    >>
    >> It's helpful for my sense of well being and privacy.

    >
    > Perhaps. Unfortunately it's a lot less helpful for your actual
    > well-being and privacy.


    Please elaborate.

    I find that knowing when an application makes a unilateral decision to
    initiate an outbound connection and call home is quite useful.

    Is there any reason why you and "Volker Birk" like to make content-free
    followups?

    --
    Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

  7. Re: Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

    Bert Hyman wrote:
    > Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers wrote:
    >> Bert Hyman wrote:
    >>> It's helpful for my sense of well being and privacy.

    >>
    >> Perhaps. Unfortunately it's a lot less helpful for your actual
    >> well-being and privacy.

    >
    > Please elaborate.
    >
    > I find that knowing when an application makes a unilateral decision to
    > initiate an outbound connection and call home is quite useful.


    Only that your personal firewall can't reliably determine whether or not
    an application establishes an unsolicited outbound connection. Meaning
    that there are ways for applications to bypass your personal firewall.

    google://personal+firewall+leak

    > Is there any reason why you and "Volker Birk" like to make content-free
    > followups?


    Because this topic has been discussed ad nauseam. You may want to
    consult a Usenet archive and read through prior discussions of this
    topic to find the answer to any question you could possibly have about
    this matter.

    cu
    59cobalt
    --
    "Personal Firewalls are crap. Throw away any personal firewall. Personal
    Firewalls are bad[tm]."
    --Malte von dem Hagen on security-basics

  8. Re: Replacement for Symantec Protection Agent?

    In news:gcr63bU5vvL1@news.in-ulm.de Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers
    wrote:

    > Bert Hyman wrote:
    >
    >> Is there any reason why you and "Volker Birk" like to make
    >> content-free followups?

    >
    > Because this topic has been discussed ad nauseam.


    Thank you.

    And, good luck.

    --
    Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

+ Reply to Thread