Best Windows Software Firewall for Power Users

Greetings all,

I hope my thread title described what I'm looking for fairly clearly. I've spent the last day looking for a decent replacement for Kerio Personal Firewall 2.x and have gone through about 15 software packages. Nearly all of them were terrible.

A good number of them would easily let in rogue traffic because they don't let you configure the firewall enough, relying on "automatic" rules. Most were designed for Joe User who does not have a clue about the structure of the Internet and in any case they lacked the functionality and simplicity of Kerio PF 2.x.

Kerio PF 2.x (and to a much lesser extent, Kerio PF 4.x) had a very well thought out and effective interface. Building firewalls around the paradigm of "allow all traffic from port 80, POP3, FTP, etc." does not make sense for the modern desktop user. This is one reason why I don't have all that much respect for hardware firewalls. This one size fits all rule does not apply in modern desktop computing. Today's user encounters a multitude of new software every day which may want to connect to the Internet, and every piece of software will have to be handled differently.

Kerio PF 2.x was built around the paradigm of "program control", i.e. every new program must be cleared before access is granted and denied. It then offers "port control" within each and every program. P2P programs use every port in the book so it makes sense to allow all their traffic through, while it might be useful to block port 80 from Outlook, for example.

None of the firewalls I used gave me this kind of functionality. Locking down an application to only one port takes 3 clicks with Kerio PF; it would be many, many more clicks on the newer firewalls, and even then the feature may not be available.

Another major difficulty I had is with "security levels". As the old saying goes "Keep It Simple, Stupid". This is something newer firewalls refuse to do. One had an option of 10 different security modes. Let's go back to Kerio PF 2.x. Three security modes - Allow All Traffic, Prompt User, Deny All Traffic. Simplicity. That's what the advanced user loves, don't you think?

There is so much bloat and irrelevant features in these products. Have they forgotten what a "firewall" is supposed to do? No, it's not supposed to be an anti-virus, a pop-up blocker or a content blocker. I simply want it to be a FIREWALL.

Does anyone know where I can find a software firewall with the features that Kerio PF 2.x had? Maybe even a clone of that version is in order? All the newer firewalls seem to be made with Joe User in mind: "let's churn out any old firewall for these idiots - they'll buy it anyway and think it's great".

BTW, I would continue to use it but the latest version in 2.x has a known issue whereby it will crash at a certain interval, thus making it unsuitable for an always-on connection.

Thanks if you can help. If you can't, it looks like it's almost impossible to get a decent software firewall and I'll have to run a Linux box to do it instead. And sorry if this is a bit long..

Anon.

Reply to
psyched132
Loading thread data ...

So they were decent replacements?

Yes, and this is bullshit. Malicious programs simply don't care.

If you dump the non-working trials of Application control, you might take a look at Wipfw and CHI-X.

BTW, your mail address is broken. Your should fix it.

Reply to
Sebastian Gottschalk

It's CHX-I :-)

Reply to
B. Nice

Try free Sygate v5.6 build 2808

formatting link

Unofficial Help:

formatting link
Casey

Reply to
Casey

Hey, he _doesn't_ want _more_ security holes, but _less_.

Reply to
Sebastian Gottschalk

I settled on Comodo firwall. Has nearly all the features I was used to on Kerio - in fact I recommend it if someones looking for a good software firewall. Had to go through about 10 other average to poor firewalls to get to it though!

I don't understand why you say it's "bullshit". Malicious apps will want to phone home with the valuable data, the users sees the unusual filename and denies the request to communicate, information leak stopped. Firewalls that don't allow application control would let this kind of traffic through as long as it goes through :80 (or whatever).

The firewalls you suggested, Wipfw and CHX-I, seem to be aimed at single-purpose mail/web servers. A port-only firewall would suit these kind of servers very well. Multi-purpose desktop systems need more flexibility.

It's certainly not broken. I've seen you argue this on another thread; let it go, it's only a public newsgroup.

Reply to
psyched132

This is boring now. Just read the discussions about this topic here, please, before discussing it again.

Yours, VB.

Reply to
Volker Birk

A personal FW is not a FW. It's only a machine level packet filter with a lot of junk in them that can't do the job to protect the user from them self, such as Application Control in them that can be easily circumvented and defeated by malware.

You should learn about FW(s) and a PFW is not a FW.

formatting link
Duane :)

Reply to
Duane Arnold

But, he is already a power user! :)

Good link.

-Frank

Reply to
Frankster

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.