I've been continuing to run Sygate. But by now, there have been no new signature updates for quite some time and it is clear the program isn't being updated.
Is it time to look elsewhere? At what point do I have to assume that Sygate can no longer provide adequate protection?
And if that point is now, what would you recommend? I also run NOD32 and an NAT router along with various spyware programs on a weekly or bi-weekly basis.
Thanks.
Louise
Sincere condolences.
The same points you could have (if you would read the discussion here) to know, that no "Personal Firewall" can.
Yours, VB.
Yep its out of date.. if your virus database is over 24 hours old then that is out of date (which is the freq. you should be updating).. Get yourself Avast! antivirus. they have a free version and a pay version, freq. updates, NOD32 is garbage, if you want a good desktop firewall i would recommend outpost, its got great logging and allows you to create custom rules ect.
Flamer.
louise wrote: I also run NOD32
What makes you believe that you require more 3rd party security utilities? What is it you do that makes you a prime target for a good ol' fashion whacking?
Wow! Sounds like you got you finger on the pulse. No one's gonna own you!
Louise, if you have been pleased with running Sygate Pro, don't be too hasty in replacing it. The only security capability you have lost is the IDS (Intrusion Detection System). I have no present or future plans to replace my v5.5 build 2710 because it has served me well. Casey
Sygate and Outpost both have security design flaws. Please read the discussions about this topic in this group.
Yours, VB.
You can get a FW router that ICSA certified and dump the PFW. The PFW is useless at that point.
Duane :)
Not if you have more than one computer connected to the FW router.
That's not true because you can certainly stop traffic between LAN IP(s) with a FW router by setting rules. So in that regard, a PFW solution is worthless.
I don't have any PFW running on any MS machine or FW running on the Linux machine behind the FW appliance.
And if the machines are sharing resources with a PFW solution enabled with the Networking ports opened on the machines, then what?
Duane :)
Just because you have ports open on the firewall it doesn't mean your open for an attack, infact all the inspection done by a firewall is on open ports (everything else is dropped).. i think that was your point anyway.. otherwise buy yourself a copy of checkpoint FW-1.. the diff between that and outpost..?? about 3000$ (but looks uber cool).
Flamer.
Not when the machines are in a networking situation and traffic is being exchanged between them. The PFW is not stopping anything. Maybe if the solution had a IDS that was in control of its integrated FW solution would it attempt to block anything it deemed a threat.
I got a WatchGuard and it only cost a $200 something at the time and it's cool enough for me.
There are also FW routers that are ICSA certified that I wouldn't run a PFW behind them either. There is no need. A NAT router for home usage that can't stop outbound, there would be some kind of host based packet filter on the machine to stop outbound if needed.
Duane :)
I think you suffer problems with reading comprehension. He wasn't saying anything about NOD32 being out of date. Besides that, by default it will update multiple times in 24 hours if needed.
NOD32 is far superior to Avast!, and it's much lighter on system resources too.
I personally saw Avast! 4 installed on a machine that was infected with a backdoor.haxdoor trojan variant and Avast! didn't even notice the infection. The trojan wouldn't allow Trend Office scan to even install. Kaspersky AVP installed fine and detected the infection but couldn't clean it. NOD32 installed, detected, and cleaned the infection. This gave the person a couple of days breathing space to get what he needed off the machine so we could wipe and reinstall the OS. (Yes, he now does backups. hehe)
You are aware, aren't you, of how well NOD32 has done in various tests? No, I didn't think you were.
NOD32 is a wonderful little program. I'm currently running a free license from a free give-away deal, but I think I'm going to renew it when it expires.
It's bordering on brilliant how near invisible and transparent it is. Unlike other AV programs I don't notice any performance degradation to having the real-time monitor running. I never have to disable it when installing programs like you have to do with some other AV solutions. I never have to remember to disable it when I want to play performance-intensive games.
It's so good at doing these things I forget I have it running & only remember I have it when it throws up a warning when I go to a web site or get an email that NOD32 doesn't like.
I was fairly indifferent to Eset and NOD32 when I started my license period, but now I'm 8 months into it and there's no doubt in my mind I'm going to cough up the money to keep my license going.
KAV is good...very good, but the performance hit the real-time monitor places on one's system is world's apart from NOD32's figures.
As for Avast! it's okay...and free. However, it's not even the best of the free AV solutions available. I believe independent tests have awarded that honor to AntiVir if I recall correctly.
Anyway, viva la NOD32!
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.