Kerio Personal Firewal 2.1.5 not working ?

I have XP (Home) w/SP2. I turned OFF XP's so called "Firewall". I installed Kerio Personal Firewal 2.1.5 and rebooted. Then I created permit rules for my net apps.

I then visited the website below :

formatting link

------------- relevant part of results ------------ Firewall Test The following ports were checked: 554, 1755, 443, 80 Out of the above ports, the following are open and permitting outbound traffic: 554,1755,443,80 Firewall status: NOT PRESENT (you may have a firewall, but it is not configured to block these ports from outbound traffic)


OK. so I created a rule for both TCP & UDP to block (deny) "Outbound" on these ports for any app. I then re-vistied the site and took the test again but came up with the same result as above.

What's going on ? How do I configure this firewall to be more effective than XP's firethingy?


Reply to
Loading thread data ...



Reply to
Ansgar -59cobalt- Wiechers

The above site/test is in my opinion to scare you and to sell you some more or less useless product. This test needs Javascript enabled to test the ports. Besides; you want to have port 80 and 443 open for outgoing traffic! Port 80 --> normal web traffic port 443 -> secure web traffic

Sorry, but i don't know how to configure any of those "Personal Firewalls"


Reply to
God Rudy

Sunbelt Software - the vendor of Sunbelt Kerio Personal Firewall Excerpts:

[quote] ...we have some reservations about personal firewall "leak testing" in general. While we appreciate and support the unique value of independent security testing, we are admittedly skeptical as to just how meaningful these leak tests really are, especially as they reflect real-world environments.

The key assumption of "leak testing" -- namely, that it is somehow useful to measure the outbound protection provided by personal firewalls in cases where malware has already executed on the test box -- strikes us as a questionable basis on which to build a security assessment. Today's malware is so malicious and cleverly designed that it is often safest to regard PCs as so thoroughly compromised that nothing on the box can be trusted once the malware executes. In short, "leak testing" starts after the game is already lost, as the malware has already gotten past the inbound firewall protection.

Moreover, "leak testing" is predicated on the further assumption that personal firewalls should warn users about outbound connections even when the involved code components are not demonstrably malicious or suspicious (as is the case with the simulator programs used for "leak testing"). In fact, this kind of program design risks pop-up fatigue in users, effectively lowering the overall security of the system -- the reason developers are increasingly shunning this design for security applications. [unquote]

'nuff said :)

Reply to
Kayman 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.