Sunbelt personal firewall

pontifex

Lifer
Dec 5, 2000
43,804
46
91
So I get an email from Sunbelt about their firewall software and it says this:


The Windows XP Firewall is worse than useless, it gives you a false sense of security --

Why is the Windows Firewall not cutting it? It only filters INCOMING traffic. That means if malware has compromised your PC, it is able to SEND OUT out your credit card data, and all other personal info. That's right, the WinXP "firewall" does not stop that!


but if it blocks incoming traffic, you shouldn't have anything come in that could send out your info anyway, right?

Yeah, i know it's all marketing, but "worse than useless"?
it must be somewhat useful if it blocks incoming stuff, right?

 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Both the Kerio Firewall which Sunbelt bought and Sygate which I think was bought up by Symantec used to be highly regarded small footprint firewalls about three years ago.
You can now buy the latest Sunbelt firewall for as little as ten bucks on their website.

But the question is how do you compare firewalls. Certainly footprint size is one comparative, two way vs. one way is another, how easy they are to train is another way, and how easy they are to configure is another way, and how badly they leak in event of a determined attack is another. What I will submit is a circa 11/07 test of leaking regarding certain popular firewalls by matousec

http://www.matousec.com/projec....php#firewalls-ratings

On a scale of 0 to 9625, the latest sunbelt firewall came in at 5200 and earned a rating of poor. Sygate 5.6 free no longer developed came in at 2350, and the sp2 firewall is rated at zero.

At least two of the very highest rated firewalls were freeware and those were onlinearmor and comodo 2.4 which are medium footprint firewalls that are almost self configure thanks to whitelists. Comodo 2.4, while still available, has been supplanted by the not yet tested CPF3 which, like online armor, stresses prevention in addition to the more traditional role of firewalls. Both are being actively developed and updated, they now represent the cutting edge of state of the arts, and both have user help forums.

One can also use websites like Gibson research's shield up to test how well your firewall preforms. If one cannot achieve a prefect rating there, which the SP2 firewall can't,
your firewall is very poor indeed. There are also a plethora of other websites to test firewalls that have some tougher tests, but I still have to ask, why should one PAY for a low rated firewall when there are quite a few MUCH BETTER ONES that are FREEWARE?

One must also check to see what Os's a given firewall works with and to what extent they support 64 bit OS versions.
 

stevem326

Senior member
Apr 5, 2005
337
0
0
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Both the Kerio Firewall which Sunbelt bought and Sygate which I think was bought up by Symantec used to be highly regarded small footprint firewalls about three years ago.
You can now buy the latest Sunbelt firewall for as little as ten bucks on their website.

But the question is how do you compare firewalls. Certainly footprint size is one comparative, two way vs. one way is another, how easy they are to train is another way, and how easy they are to configure is another way, and how badly they leak in event of a determined attack is another. What I will submit is a circa 11/07 test of leaking regarding certain popular firewalls by matousec

http://www.matousec.com/projec....php#firewalls-ratings

On a scale of 0 to 9625, the latest sunbelt firewall came in at 5200 and earned a rating of poor. Sygate 5.6 free no longer developed came in at 2350, and the sp2 firewall is rated at zero.

At least two of the very highest rated firewalls were freeware and those were onlinearmor and comodo 2.4 which are medium footprint firewalls that are almost self configure thanks to whitelists. Comodo 2.4, while still available, has been supplanted by the not yet tested CPF3 which, like online armor, stresses prevention in addition to the more traditional role of firewalls. Both are being actively developed and updated, they now represent the cutting edge of state of the arts, and both have user help forums.

One can also use websites like Gibson research's shield up to test how well your firewall preforms. If one cannot achieve a prefect rating there, which the SP2 firewall can't,
your firewall is very poor indeed. There are also a plethora of other websites to test firewalls that have some tougher tests, but I still have to ask, why should one PAY for a low rated firewall when there are quite a few MUCH BETTER ONES that are FREEWARE?

One must also check to see what Os's a given firewall works with and to what extent they support 64 bit OS versions.

Wow, Zone Alarm Free (one of the most widely used firewalls) received a Very Poor rating...yikes!!