Norton Internet Security 2005 Personal Firewall slows down Windows XP startup

Folks,

After some basic checking, it's obvious that my recent install of NIS

2005, and specifically, Norton Personal Firewall is causing a 30+ second delay of bootup of Windows XP. My background wallpaper appears, but icons take much longer to come up.

I disabled that specific feature of NIS 2005, and reinitiated the firewall that Windows XP SP2 uses.

Are there any fixes for this? I'd sure like to use this Norton feature that I paid good money for.

Evan Joanette

Reply to
Evan Joanette
Loading thread data ...

I already have a NAT router.

Tried the Zonealarm trial, it didn't add a 30 second wait to the boot time. Nor does Windows' built-in firewall. I would think that many people here are tinkerers like me...and find themselves rebooting their machines (by design) many times a day.

Be wary of being defensive of poorly designed software. I'm not downloading freeware or pirating this stuff. If I pay £50 for software, I want it to work the way I want it to work.

For now, will continue to use the Windows firewall.

Reply to
Evan

Please don't take offense, but you did purchase a Symantech product.

They are NOT known for their performance, or their impact on the performance of other software they work with/on.

If you want to spend $ on a good product, I am sure there are quite a few that can be recommended.

Personally, I would put a nice small firewall in between your NAT router and your box. There are any number of free alternatives!

HTH

Smooter

Reply to
smooter

I'd ask for a refund if I were you.

Jason

Reply to
Jason Edwards

You installed a service that is going to load and protect the OS and you actually mind if it slows down the windows boot? It's loading and starting itself before a lot of the Windows services so that it can protect your computer.

If you really want to protect your computer get a simple NAT Router and install it between your internet connection and your computer.

Reply to
Leythos

Do what Leythos said. Get something between the PC and the Internet. A NAT router is a good start.

Jason

Reply to
Jason Edwards

i do not know why people are SOOOOOOO incredibly stupid!! you do not need a software firewall if you are behind a NAT router or better. there is absdolutely no need for one. so just get rid of freaking norton cept maybe for virus, but then even better is

formatting link
for a non slowing down virus program.

Reply to
Joe

yeah, free as in none. people do not need a software firewall if you have a router. sheese. none of my friends are that way and i am not, my uncle is not who is a total expert. NEVER any problems. a router is just fine. the only people who need more are companies. unless the user is really stupid.

Reply to
Joe

Some AVs do a check of all the RAM at boot up, that is a good thing. If you have a lot of RAM it may slow down the start up. Or perhaps you haven't enough RAM and XP need to use the swap file.

Krohon

Reply to
Krohon

That is SOOOOOO stupid! Most agree that a combination of a router and a software firewall is an essential step. But of course you and your uncle, the 'total expert' (LOL!), know best. ROTFL!

Reply to
Bud

I'm sorry for being hard. I guess I was angry about nothing when I wrote that and just feel a software firewall is totally not necessary if you are behind a nat. i never have problems but then i dont download unknown files/sources and i don't use p2p and if i did, you can't get viruses from mpeg files i don't think. movie files. anyway i dont know. i just look at software firewall as useless if one is behind even a lowly linksys or belkin etc. because nothing has ever happened to me or anyone i know that are behind such a simple device.

Reply to
Joe

Bud I do not know best, only from experience and a NAT is plenty good enough. I run windows xp pro as admin always, you can't install apps as a limited user so you must run as an admin. i hate it when people suggest otherwise, they tell you don't run as an admin, then how in the hell do you install software? you don't. so this is pathetically insanely stuipid to suggest.

i also never have problems behind simple nat devices. never. they block everything incomming and it just works. so in my opinion there's absolutely no need for software firewall even for a total newbie. the only reason a software firewall is worth anything to me is if they just download and install anything they find and the software can possibly even in its default config block bad apps from going online maybe.

Reply to
Joe

See, I am not wrong. logged in as user, you can't install apps unless you can via the run as. but a lot of people don't have an admin password, so they can't. that is my point and i was not and am not wrong. you can not install apps as a user unless you know the admin password so i never was wrong.

Reply to
Joe

Joe, what you don't seem to understand is that many people don't understand security and don't really have a clue about securing their systems. While a NAT device is always a first choice there are many things that a NAT device will not protect the user from - namely the user. A personal firewall application running on a computer can work very nicely with a NAT box and provide some level of protection against rogue applications. While it's easy to compromise a PFW and as easy to misconfigure them, they can and do offer an extra layer of protection.

With that being said, in the early days when I used a NAT solution, before I bought a real firewall, I never experienced a compromise, but I'm smart enough to secure the systems, monitor the in/out bound logs, make sure all systems are protected by AV and users don't run as admins... Not many home users have this level of skill or even know they need to do these things.

For people running a business or keeping financial records on their computers, a NAT box is the first line, then a PFW solution on the PC properly configured is the next. User education is third along with locking down the apps and systems.

Reply to
Leythos

I run XP Pro from a limited account UNTIL I need to install. This minimizes exposure.

Not true. Just one for instance:

Q/ But most hardware residential firewalls have an Achilles' heel in that they typically treat any kind of traffic traveling from the local network out to the Internet as safe, which can sometimes be a problem.

Consider this scenario: What would happen if you received an e-mail message or visited a website that contained a concealed program? Let's say this program was designed to install itself on your machine and then surreptitiously communicate with someone via the Internet ? a distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack zombie or a keystroke logger, for example? And trust me, this is by no means an unlikely scenario.

To most broadband hardware firewalls, the traffic generated by such programs would appear legitimate since it originated inside your network and would most likely be let through. /Q

formatting link
It's good you have had no problem but I don't think your experience would hold true for the general public.

Reply to
Bud

That was my point. ;-)

Reply to
Bud

no, i know you can run apps as a user, you just can't install them as the user. it's ok though. I am sorry if i sound hard. bad last week, :(

Reply to
Joe

Joe, you're wrong, you can install the apps as Administrator and then login as User and still use the apps. There are only a couple standard apps where I know they won't run as a user account (QuickBooks being one), but most apps will RUN after installed by an administrator account.

There is also a run-as ability that you must have missed.

My mother in-law runs a small business and unless using QuickBooks, she runs as a User account all the time.

So, when you want to install apps/updates/make system changes you logon as Administrator and only do those things. When you want to fetch/send email or browse the web or play games or use Office 2003 or PhotoShop or other apps you logon as User account level and it works fine.

Reply to
Leythos

That's because most "broadband hardware firewalls" are not firewalls, they are routers with NAT functionality, not firewalls. There is a BIG difference between a firewall appliance and a router that provides NAT.

Reply to
Leythos

Ok, I'll give that to you - technically you are not wrong, but your assumption and assertions are misleading.

Yes, most people run as Admin since they don't know any better and since it's the default for Windows, but with a little education they can learn to run as User level accounts.

The point I though you were making was that you can't run programs as a User, which is not true. I guess I might have read more into what I though you were trying to say than I should have.

Reply to
Leythos

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.