Zone Alarm vs Kerio Firewall - Firewalls

This is a discussion on Zone Alarm vs Kerio Firewall - Firewalls ; I'm using the free Zone Alarm v2.6.362 as a firewall on my Win95, 98, and XP computers on my home wireless Linksys network. I'm testing a trial version of the new Kerio Firewall by Counterspy on my XP laptop. The ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Zone Alarm vs Kerio Firewall

  1. Zone Alarm vs Kerio Firewall

    I'm using the free Zone Alarm v2.6.362 as a firewall on my Win95, 98,
    and XP computers on my home wireless Linksys network. I'm testing a
    trial version of the new Kerio Firewall by Counterspy on my XP laptop.
    The interface is a little confusing, as far as understanding what it's
    accomplishing. Can anyone give me an opinion as to how much better
    Kerio performs as a firewall, compared to Zone Alarm?

    Thanks!
    Scott

  2. Re: Zone Alarm vs Kerio Firewall

    On 12/23/2006 10:39 AM, something possessed Scott to write:
    > I'm using the free Zone Alarm v2.6.362 as a firewall on my Win95, 98,
    > and XP computers on my home wireless Linksys network. I'm testing a
    > trial version of the new Kerio Firewall by Counterspy on my XP laptop.
    > The interface is a little confusing, as far as understanding what it's
    > accomplishing. Can anyone give me an opinion as to how much better
    > Kerio performs as a firewall, compared to Zone Alarm?
    >
    > Thanks!
    > Scott

    I've used both, and in my opinion, Kerio is the better product (but I
    think ZA takes less resources, though I could be mistaking). With
    Kerio, eve though it's a "trial" version, it is free after the 30 days
    are up, you just lose web-content filtering (which I don't even use with
    AdblockPlus and FF). Some neat things I like about Kerio that ZA
    doesn't have are: an integrated utility similar to sysinternals TCPMon,
    and internal monitoring that ZA doesn't provide such as alerts when a
    process has recently changed or when a process is doing something to
    another process. Also, with Kerio, you can set port access rules in
    addition to Program-access rules. Anyway, I hope this helps.

  3. Re: Zone Alarm vs Kerio Firewall

    William wrote:
    >
    > On 12/23/2006 10:39 AM, something possessed Scott to write:
    > > I'm using the free Zone Alarm v2.6.362 as a firewall on my Win95, 98,
    > > and XP computers on my home wireless Linksys network. I'm testing a
    > > trial version of the new Kerio Firewall by Counterspy on my XP laptop.
    > > The interface is a little confusing, as far as understanding what it's
    > > accomplishing. Can anyone give me an opinion as to how much better
    > > Kerio performs as a firewall, compared to Zone Alarm?
    > >
    > > Thanks!
    > > Scott

    > I've used both, and in my opinion, Kerio is the better product (but I
    > think ZA takes less resources, though I could be mistaking). With
    > Kerio, eve though it's a "trial" version, it is free after the 30 days
    > are up, you just lose web-content filtering (which I don't even use with
    > AdblockPlus and FF). Some neat things I like about Kerio that ZA
    > doesn't have are: an integrated utility similar to sysinternals TCPMon,
    > and internal monitoring that ZA doesn't provide such as alerts when a
    > process has recently changed or when a process is doing something to
    > another process. Also, with Kerio, you can set port access rules in
    > addition to Program-access rules. Anyway, I hope this helps.


    You don't think ZA is a resource hog?

    I'll have what William's having!

    Notan

  4. Re: Zone Alarm vs Kerio Firewall

    On 12/24/2006 11:43 AM, something possessed Notan to write:
    > William wrote:
    >> On 12/23/2006 10:39 AM, something possessed Scott to write:
    >>> I'm using the free Zone Alarm v2.6.362 as a firewall on my Win95, 98,
    >>> and XP computers on my home wireless Linksys network. I'm testing a
    >>> trial version of the new Kerio Firewall by Counterspy on my XP laptop.
    >>> The interface is a little confusing, as far as understanding what it's
    >>> accomplishing. Can anyone give me an opinion as to how much better
    >>> Kerio performs as a firewall, compared to Zone Alarm?
    >>>
    >>> Thanks!
    >>> Scott

    >> I've used both, and in my opinion, Kerio is the better product (but I
    >> think ZA takes less resources, though I could be mistaking). With
    >> Kerio, eve though it's a "trial" version, it is free after the 30 days
    >> are up, you just lose web-content filtering (which I don't even use with
    >> AdblockPlus and FF). Some neat things I like about Kerio that ZA
    >> doesn't have are: an integrated utility similar to sysinternals TCPMon,
    >> and internal monitoring that ZA doesn't provide such as alerts when a
    >> process has recently changed or when a process is doing something to
    >> another process. Also, with Kerio, you can set port access rules in
    >> addition to Program-access rules. Anyway, I hope this helps.

    >
    > You don't think ZA is a resource hog?
    >
    > I'll have what William's having!
    >
    > Notan

    Compared to Kerio, IMO No. But I havent' objectively tested this yet.
    Of course, with ZA the I have all the extra bells and whistles (Bloat)
    disabled (like AV Monitoring and e-mail protection).

+ Reply to Thread