• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Trying to ID the *best* Internet Security Suite

E

evilharp

Senior member
First off, I realize that a Suite rarely combines the best AV with the best Soft Firewall. However, my friends are inclined to pay for a good suite (Home Office type), and they want the savings ($$$) that a suite offers. Anti-spam is not important as they are all good at avoiding it using POP3/SMTP for trusted senders and HTTP freemail (Hot, G, whatever) for untrusted senders (ie. the usual spam sources, on-line registrations, etc...).

Second, the Free AVs are not in the class that my friends need. All were using Antivir or Avast, and all found numerous viruses with Kaspersky's online scanner that the Freebies missed.

Third, the Free Firewalls are a scarce breed. The AT forums free favourites are no longer available (Sygate, Kerio), leaving Zonealarm as the lone contender. Zonealarm is good, but it lacks specific port control in the free version, and the recent "phone home" behaviour is alarming (reported on the Inq and elsewhere).

Edit: Kerio is free again, see Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall. Ownership has changed, but it seems to be the same product. $14.95 US until Mar 31, 2006 (1 year sub, $10 renewal) for the full version, or a free version with disabled functions. I'll test it, and see if it is still good.

Edit: Free hardware firewalls such as nVidia's nF3/nF4 shield, are not an option. My friends are all heavy dial-up users. They all use laptops, and travel extensively, so broadband is not always available. And when it is, lugging around an external firewall is out of the question.

Where noted, trials were downloaded, and Firewall testing employed PC Flank and Shields Up tests.

So here are the current contenders, with current observations:

Kaspersky Personal Security Suite $69.95 US for 2 year subscription

AV
Not an issue. Insanely good results.

Firewall
Weird results. Did not ace the stealth tests on either test site. Weird thing is it passed on the second attempt (adaptive behaviour?) During port tests the firewall locked out (blocked) both sites completely as it viewed them as attackers. This function was disabled to complete the tests,
Port control, filters and rule systems are advanced.
No "Zone" controls (ie trusted versus internet).

F-Secure Internet Security 2006 $59.95 US for 1 year subscription

AV
Excellent. Now includes Blacklight (integrated) for Rootkit detection.
Firewall
Great. Aced all tests on PcFlank and Shields up.
No "Zone" controls (ie trusted versus internet).

Norton Internet Security? 2006 $99.99 US for 2 year subscription

No trial tested yet. Seems to be reviewed (<== key word) highly, but despised by most forum members.
Really expensive compared to Kaspersky.
Con - Resource PIG!

McAfee Internet Security Suite 2006 $100.00 CDN for 1 year subscription (<== As my friends and I are all Canadian, we don't quality for the current McAfee rebates)


No trial tested yet. Seems to be reviewed (<== key word) highly, but despised by most forum members.
Really expensive compared to Kaspersky.
Con - AV isn't as good as Kaspersky, F-Secure or Norton.

If anyone can add anything to this, I'd really appreciate it. These 4 were selected as their AV components rate high on most every test. Any other suggestions will be considered as well. Note the Zonealarm suite has been ruled out as the AV component is rated as "Crap" in most circles.

F-Secure is currently leading in all areas but one, price.

Edit: I've tested Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall and it passes all tests... once it is set up correctly. Stealth mode is not enabled by default, and can be added with a rule change as described here. As a result the hunt for a Suite may be at an end.

Final Edit: The suite hunt is over. My friends settled for Kerio + Kaspersky or F-Secure. Thanks for all the input :beer:
 
[*]Suites suck.
[*]Kaspersky, Nod32, or BitDefender for the AV.
[*]IMHO there's no need for a software firewall if you have an inexpensive cable/dsl router and some common sense. If you insist on a firewall use the free version of Kerio.
 
Originally posted by: John
[*]Suites suck.
[*]Kaspersky, Nod32, or BitDefender for the AV.
[*]IMHO there's no need for a software firewall if you have an inexpensive cable/dsl router and some common sense. If you insist on a firewall use the free version of Kerio.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply.

Yes suites aren't the best, but it's what they want.

Broadband isn't part of the equation, so the software firewall is required.

Interestingly, Kerio is now free again?? It is now Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall . Actually, it is $14.95 or Free for a neutered version. Looks like Sunbelt bought it from Kerio. Anyone know if it is still good?
 
Let me just throw in that no matter what they pick, I'd pimp a Limited user account on them if they're interested in "best" security. Or maybe you already did that 😀

And if they have WinXP Professional Edition, consider setting up a disabled-by-default Software Restriction Policy that applies to non-Admins, like shown in this movie clip. Set as shown, this would prevent executing stuff anywhere that the Limited account (or an exploit leveraging it) can put them. And a Limited account can't put new files anywhere that the SRP would permit execution of them. :evil:
 
Suites suck. Also, they are using Windows XP, right? Then what do they need a seperate firewall for? Just use the native software firewall.
 
One other remark:

Second, the Free AVs are not in the class that my friends need. All were using Antivir or Avast, and all found numerous viruses with Kaspersky's online scanner that the Freebies missed.
Click to expand...
This sounds like it could call for some behavior modification and risk-avoidance training. Unless the security suite is supposed to be a 100% substitute for that, I mean... 😀
 
Originally posted by: mechBgon

Let me just throw in that no matter what they pick, I'd pimp a Limited user account on them if they're interested in "best" security. Or maybe you already did that

And if they have WinXP Professional Edition, consider setting up a disabled-by-default Software Restriction Policy that applies to non-Admins, like shown in this movie clip. Set as shown, this would prevent executing stuff anywhere that the Limited account (or an exploit leveraging it) can put them. And a Limited account can't put new files anywhere that the SRP would permit execution of them.

One other remark:

Second, the Free AVs are not in the class that my friends need. All were using Antivir or Avast, and all found numerous viruses with Kaspersky's online scanner that the Freebies missed.
Click to expand...
This sounds like it could call for some behavior modification and risk-avoidance training. Unless the security suite is supposed to be a 100% substitute for that, I mean... 😀
Click to expand...

All use limited accounts, and I'll mention SRP to them. The big problem with the viruses is the sources. Most infections were found in e-mail (surprise) and client sourced data (CD- Roms, etc...). My friends work in sales and marketing, so they have a high exposure to viruses through their customers. I mentioned the Kaspersky on-line scan and they were floored at the infections they discovered.
 
Originally posted by: KoolDrew
Suites suck. Also, they are using Windows XP, right? Then what do they need a seperate firewall for? Just use the native software firewall.
Click to expand...

Sorry, the XP-SP2 firewall is garbage. Much better than the original one, but very weak compared to most everything on the market.
 
Kaspersky is still the market leader in terms of how frequently they update the definitions, 24 per day. Until recently, Norton and McAfee home-user versions were on a weekly schedule, which made me uncomfortable. I know McAfee's up to daily now, and I believe Norton's 2006 products are as well. F-Secure is doing multiple updates per day where warranted, they set a record of 12 in one day a while back (according to their blog, which I read a lot).

Given how rapidly some email worms propogate, like the three (or more) Bagles currently attacking, the frequency of updates and the vendor's response time sound like they could be important to your road warriors. If it were me, I'd narrow it down to either F-Secure or Kaspersky and not weigh the price into the decision very much.
 
Originally posted by: mechBgon
Kaspersky is still the market leader in terms of how frequently they update the definitions, 24 per day. Until recently, Norton and McAfee home-user versions were on a weekly schedule, which made me uncomfortable. I know McAfee's up to daily now, and I believe Norton's 2006 products are as well. F-Secure is doing multiple updates per day where warranted, they set a record of 12 in one day a while back (according to their blog, which I read a lot).

Given how rapidly some email worms propogate, like the three (or more) Bagles currently attacking, the frequency of updates and the vendor's response time sound like they could be important to your road warriors. If it were me, I'd narrow it down to either F-Secure or Kaspersky and not weigh the price into the decision very much.
Click to expand...

You are a mind reader. The prices alone eliminated Symantec and McAfee from the hunt.

As it is, my friends are very happy with the Kerio firewall, so it seems to have eliminated the need for a Suite. It's good to see that a nice, reliable, free firewall (other than Zone Alarm) exists.

Right now the evaluation is coming down to AV capabilities and price. F-Secure and Kapersky are both very close in that regard. I'll post the results once the decisions (several friends remember) are made.
 
I've been using Norton Internet Security for about 3 years now and I love it. Sure you need a good machine with a good ammount of RAM, but most PCs now days have that.

Software firewalls are very important because they keep data from going out unless it is authorized by the user. I wouldn't trust a computer without a software firewall.
 
Originally posted by: mechBgon
Kaspersky is still the market leader in terms of how frequently they update the definitions, 24 per day. Until recently, Norton and McAfee home-user versions were on a weekly schedule, which made me uncomfortable. I know McAfee's up to daily now, and I believe Norton's 2006 products are as well. F-Secure is doing multiple updates per day where warranted, they set a record of 12 in one day a while back (according to their blog, which I read a lot).

Given how rapidly some email worms propogate, like the three (or more) Bagles currently attacking, the frequency of updates and the vendor's response time sound like they could be important to your road warriors. If it were me, I'd narrow it down to either F-Secure or Kaspersky and not weigh the price into the decision very much.
Click to expand...

You are a mind reader. The prices alone nearly eliminated Symantec and McAfee from the hunt. Some reading on the web seems to have finished the job.

As it is, my friends are very happy with the Kerio firewall, so it seems to have eliminated the need for a Suite. It's good to see that a nice, reliable, free firewall (other than Zone Alarm) exists.

Right now the evaluation is coming down to AV capabilities and price. F-Secure and Kapersky are both very close in that regard. I'll post the results once the decisions (several friends remember) are made.
 
Sorry, the XP-SP2 firewall is garbage. Much better than the original one, but very weak compared to most everything on the market.
Click to expand...

:roll:

Define "weak." Kerio does nothing but complicate things and use extra system resources. It offers no security benefits over the native SP2 firewall.
 
Originally posted by: KoolDrew
Sorry, the XP-SP2 firewall is garbage. Much better than the original one, but very weak compared to most everything on the market.
Click to expand...

:roll:

Define "weak." Kerio does nothing but complicate things and use extra system resources. It offers no security benefits over the native SP2 firewall.
Click to expand...

The SP2 firewall is weak in the way that it manages both the flow of data (outbound) and the way it protects itself from attack.

Recent Examples:

Sony Stinx Trojan. This delightful gem:
exploits the Sony DRM cloaking technology (aka rootkit) installed by music CDs published by Sony after March 2005. This allows the malware to be hidden from view - effectively masking its presence even from most antivirus scanners. The Sony Stinx Trojan installs an IRC Backdoor Trojan that allows remote access to compromised PCs, downloads other malware, and disables the Windows XP firewall.
Click to expand...
(Source)

A simple registry Exploit in the Windows SP2 Firewall allows malware to access the internet without alerting the user.

3rd party firewalls are designed (the good ones at least) to protect themselves from exploits on the host PC. Most will alert the user to confirm shutdown or signal that a service/process has failed. Sure, it may add some complication to the process, but the hassle is far less than a full blown exploit taking control of your PC.

 
The suite hunt is over. My friends settled for Kerio + Kaspersky or F-Secure.

Thanks for all the input :beer: !
 
A simple registry Exploit in the Windows SP2 Firewall allows malware to access the internet without alerting the user.
Click to expand...
In point of fact, a Limited user doesn't have the power to create new keys in that part of the Registry, however. They can't shut the Windows Firewall down, either.

Your friends owe you for researching the security suite (or un-suite) options. Nice work! :beer:

 
Panda titanium antivirus with Firewall protects the two most important PCs in my house...the kid's rig gets by with aVast security suit and my work lappy has Comcast's free mcafee suite.

A software firewall is needed, btw, to control what gets out of your Pc as well as what gets in. The XP firewall,from wahti hear, is lacking in that regard.
 
Outbound filtering at the host-level does absolutely nothing for security. Once your system is compromised, it is compromised. At that point the code can do whatever it wants, with or without your knowledge. If you have something on your machine that really wants to send something out an outbound filtering firewall at the host-level won't help one bit.

Just run under a limited user account, use the SP2 firewall, and use Kaspersky.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top