Running XP firewall - any need for commercial one?

[Zoidmeister]

Running the default XP firewall and just curious if there is any need to run a commercial one as well?

Setup: computes connected via Linksys running latest firmware and Linksys connected to DSL modem.

I test drove the Norton and McAfee firewalls and didn't notice any warnings/violations etc so un-installed those pigs. Norton firewall/privacy thing was nice at blocking pop-up adds but sometimes was a pain in the ass.

On a side note I've never ran any anti-virus software and always managed to stay virus free. Simply watch where I surf and delete suspicious emails before the viewer has a chance to load/run any activeX crap.

[barbos]

you are asking whether or not to trust microsoft????

Your Router is probably blocking 95% of it....

[killets]

i'm not gonna say the xp firewall doesn't work since i never really tried using it. the configurable options weren't very impressive though, so i did install something else.

barbos is right, if you're using a router with NAT (you can see if you're using NAT if you check your computer's ip and its 192.168.xxx.xxx), by default the NAT will not forward ports to you unless you were dumb enough to do it willingly or put yourself in the DMZ (de-militarized zone).

if you care what i'm using, I installed norton internet security 2004. it comes with norton antivirus + norton firewall. it was like $20 after rebate a while ago (i think compusa, but i forget).

if you don't really care for buying software, umm.. stay away from the norton 2004 version(unless you specifically found a cracked version), since it does product activation. its easier to goto a friend and copy his norton 2003 cd, since it doesn't do that.

another popular one is zone alarm. its shareware/crippleware i think, and you can of course buy it online.

[barbos]

I'm in my router's DMZ for various reasons. I use BlackICE for a firewall (application protection disabled)

[Zoidmeister]

Thx guys you confirmed some of what I was assuming.

Linksys NAT'S and the client machines receive un-routable/pingable IP's (192.168.1.X) ... so that should be good enough pending having a virus install itself on your box (via ActiveX or some other script) and then connect out.

[MadDoc]

A hardware nat firewall is usually the best but it doesn't prevent apps from going to the net. The best firewall you can get is checkpoint but that is a little too config heavy for daily use. The one I use is the newest tiny firewall with stateful packet inspection and ids guard.

[Candide]

Barbos, it has been a long time since I paid attention to network security to this degree, but BlackICE used to be one of THE WORST personal softwares out there. This article is old, but it has a nice test. BICE denied for a LONG LONG time that their software was bad, if they kept that attitude it very well may still be. Eitherway I wouldn't recomend it anymore unless they fired everyone on the team and stole some from a more reliable company.

http://www.grc.com/lt/leaktest.htm

Gibson research company's page. Has some great articles on it. This one is really funny:
http://www.grc.com/dos/grcdos.htm

[QuackMD]

I use the new version of Tiny Personal Firewall (version 3 i think) seems to do well for me. It was free and works really well. Fully customizable and can interface with FTP clients for authorization to open ports and such..

http://www.tiny.com

[barbos]

The only fault I could see is that it only blocks incoming traffic. That is fine for me, because I am extremely careful. I got it for under $4 so I'm not complaining.

It blocks RPC attacks and that is enough for me... haha


Appreciate the warning though.

[Zoidmeister]

May try out that Tiny one Quack since I really don't want a memory hog yet probably feel better running something more than XP which as someone mentioned just blocks incoming.